Patna High Court
Vijay Mahto @ Vijay Kumar PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Mahto, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, alleging that 125 litres of liquor were recovered from a motorcycle. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle, and that the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by another accused in police custody, which he contended lacks evidentiary value. He further highlighted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the doctrines of deemed possession and presumed offender, strengthening his claim of innocence. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and a condition that the trial court verify his antecedents before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offender is not in actual possession of the contraband and the case relies on a custodial confessional statement.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, which removed the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- CrPC Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19546 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
Vijay Mahto @ Vijay Kumar Prasad S/o Brahamdev Mahto @ Brahamdev
Prasad R/o Village - Chanda Bin Toli, P.S - Gaura, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 125 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not
the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated
based on confessional statement of apprehended accused in
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is
also submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19546 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed
offender has been done away with.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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 Marhowraah P.S. Case No.119/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19546 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…