Patna High Court
Sujeet Chaudhary @ Surjeet ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Sujeet Chaudhary, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 for allegedly possessing 15 litres of liquor recovered from his joint‑family house. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested on the spot, and that the liquor could not be conclusively linked to him or his knowledge, especially after the 2018 amendment that abolished the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the petitioner furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. It directed that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., emphasizing the trial court’s role in verifying antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession on the petitioner’s liability.
- Whether joint‑family ownership of the property affects the presumption of possession.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition and excise
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17512 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2026 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Sujeet Chaudhary @ Surjeet Chaudhary S/o Triloki Chaudhary Resident of
Village - Laxmipur, P.S - Suryapura, District - Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramchandra Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 15 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner. It is
next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as
such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and
the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot
be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner, who had kept the
liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17512 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the
instance of chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Suryapura P.S. Case No.34/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17512 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…