Patna High Court
Dinesh ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents.
Summary
Petitioners Dinesh Chaudhary and his wife Lalita Devi were implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for allegedly possessing 15 litres of liquor recovered from their jointly owned house. They applied for anticipatory bail, contending that they were not arrested, that the liquor was not in their conscious possession, that the property is a joint family house, and that the amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., directing the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the absence of conscious possession and the joint family nature of the property negate liability under the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- joint family property
- excise law
- Section 30
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20560 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2026 Thana- Ramgarh Chowk District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Dinesh Chaudhary S/O Jato Chaudhary @ Bhuneshwar Chaudhary R/O
Village - Kamta Nagar, P.S- Ramgarh Chowk, Dist- Lakhisarai
2. Lalita Devi W/O Dinesh Chaaudhary R/O Village - Kamta Nagar, P.S-
Ramgarh Chowk, Dist- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise
Act and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and is
a woman and allegation is of recovery of 15 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.20560 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as
such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it were 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 a lady who came out of the house but did not
disclose her name 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 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.10,000/- (Rupees One 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 Ramgarh Chowk P.S. Case No. 36 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20560 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than two cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of even 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 has antecedent of only two cases and petitioner
no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…