Patna High Court
Anil Urao @ Anil UrawversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Urao, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging possession of 95 litres of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022. He argued that the liquor was recovered from a joint family house, that he had no conscious possession, and that the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment. He also claimed a clean criminal record and that the key witnesses were hostile towards him. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence was non‑bailable. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and a verification of the petitioner’s antecedents by the trial court, with confirmation to follow if he is found to have a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in the context of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession applies post‑2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the nature of the joint family property affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 438
- Section 482
- excise law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17856 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2025 Thana- CHHATAPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
Anil Urao @ Anil Uraw S/o Sri Ramdev Uranw R/o Village - Chunni Ward
No. 11, P.S - Chhatapur, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 95 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17856 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the behest of
the independent witnesses, namely, Shatrughan Mandal and
Ashok Mandal with whom he is on an inimical term.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let 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 Chhatapur P.S. Case No. 343 of 2025
corresponding to S.T. Excise No. 1199 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17856 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…