Patna High Court
Dasai PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, as the petitioners were not in conscious possession and the concept of deemed possession has been removed.
Summary
Dasai Paswan and Lawkush Paswan sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 44.2 litres of liquor from their joint family house. They argued that the liquor was not in their conscious possession, that the house is a joint family property, and that the 2018 amendment abolished the doctrine of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. Justice Satyavrat Verma granted provisional anticipatory bail on condition of a Rs.5,000 bond with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents. If petitioner 1 is found to have any prior case or petitioner 2 has more than one, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed. The order reflects the court’s view that the petitioners’ lack of conscious possession and the removal of deemed possession justify bail pending verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case involving alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession applies after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
- Whether joint family ownership of the premises precludes attribution of possession to the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18745 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2026 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Dasai Paswan S/o- Late Bikrama Paswan R/o Village- Baraki Kharari, PS-
Kargahar, Dist- Rohtas
2. Lawkush Paswan @ Chhotu @ Lawkush Parasan S/o- Dasai Paswan R/o
Village- Baraki Kharari, PS- Kargahar, Dist- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their 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 petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner
no. 2 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 44.2 litres of liquor from the house
of the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18745 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/3
submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as
such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the
petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor
kept in the house was within their knowledge and after
amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of
deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away
with. It is next submitted that petitioners came to be implicated
at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom they are on an
inimical term.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners, above-named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each 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 Karagahar P.S. Case No. 42 of 2026,
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. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18745 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
3/3
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of even one
case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than one case,
it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their
antecedent 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 no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner
no. 2 has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.