Patna High Court
Raja KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Petitioner Raja Kumar was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 17 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He argued that he had no conscious possession, the house being joint family property, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act eliminated the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. He also highlighted that the FIR did not name the informant, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond and two sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged possession is not in conscious possession and the concept of deemed possession has been removed.
- Whether the absence of an informant’s name in the FIR affects the validity of the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1854 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-545 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Raja Kumar S/o- Arjun Sahani Village- Bhatahan PS- Muffasil Distt -East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 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 the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 17 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1854 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge
of the petitioner. It is next submitted that after 2018 amendment
in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be
implicated at the instance of local people, but then the name of
the person, who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not
disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution.
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 Muffasil
P.S. Case No. 545 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1854 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
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
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…