Patna High Court
Birju Mukhiya @ Virju MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, holding that the absence of possession and the lack of evidentiary value of the co‑accused’s confession justify bail under the amended provisions.
Summary
The Patna High Court considered a petition for anticipatory bail filed by Birju Mukhiya, who feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 22 litres of liquor from the house of Madhusudan Ram. The petitioner asserted that he had no possession of the liquor, no relationship with the alleged offender, and that the only evidence was a confessional statement made by Madhusudan while in police custody, which lacked evidentiary value. He further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the offence warranted detention. The Court, after weighing the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and a condition that the trial court verify the petitioner’s antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, but if a clean antecedent is verified, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the accused claims no possession and no direct involvement?
- Does the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminate the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender for the purpose of granting bail?
- Can a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody be relied upon as substantive evidence for arrest?
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- police custody
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18299 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2026 Thana- BIRAUL District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Birju Mukhiya @ Virju Mukhiya Son of Santosh Mukhiya Resident of
Village- Missi, P.S.- Kusheshwar Asthan, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saurav Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 22 liters of liquor from house of Madhusudan Ram.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner has no concern or relation with Madhusudan and
he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18299 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
Madhusudan in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in
the excise act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with.
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, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
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 Biraul
P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18299 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.