Patna High Court
Sudhir Pandit @ Sudhir Kumar PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to verification of their antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Sudhir Pandit and Sudhir Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 240.63 litres of liquor from two autos. They contended they had clean antecedents, were not caught with the liquor, were not owners of the vehicles, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement made by Raghvendra while in police custody, which they argued lacked evidentiary value. They further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties each, and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents within six weeks, after which the bail would be confirmed if they were found to have clean records. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail for that petitioner would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody has evidentiary value for the purpose of granting bail.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminated the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20130 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2026 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. Sudhir Pandit @ Sudhir Kumar Pandit S/O Bhonu Pandit Resident of
Village- Berai, P.S- Hathauri, Dist- Muzaffarpur.
2. Sudhir Rai @ Sudhir Kumar Ray @ Sudhir Kumar S/O Shatrudhan Rai R/O
Village- Berai, P.S- Hathauri, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Shaheen Begum, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 31-03-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 240.63 liters of liquor from two Autos.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession and are not the
owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20130 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
confessional statement of Raghvendra 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 petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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) 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 Ahiyapur
(Garha O.P.) P.S. Case No. 131 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 petitioners and in the
event if it is found that any of the petitioners have antecedent of
even one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20130 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to the petitioner who
had concealed his antecedent, but after verification if it is found
that petitioners are persons 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.