Patna High Court
Pukar MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Pukar Mukhiya, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Sections 30(a) and 37(2) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of six litres of liquor. He argued that he was not arrested at the scene, had no direct possession, and was implicated only through a confessional statement of co‑accused, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value, especially after the 2018 amendment that removed the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. The order is conditional: if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case, it will be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in view of alleged offences under the Excise Act.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act, which abolished deemed possession, affects the bail application.
- Whether a confessional statement of co‑accused can be the basis to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 37(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18175 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-446 Year-2025 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Pukar Mukhiya Son of Late Pradip Mukhiya Resident of Village - Bahera
Jahidpur, P.S.- Nanpur, District - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Sharda Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 37(2) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 06 litres of liquor from
possession of three apprehended accused persons.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and he has no concern
or relation with the apprehended accused and he came to be
implicated based on confessional statement of apprehended
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18175 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
accused in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary
value and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept
of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done
away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Nanpur P. S. Case No.446 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18175 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.