Patna High Court
Awadhesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond, sureties and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
Awadhesh Rai applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under IPC sections 272, 273, 420, 120(B) and 34, and several provisions of the Excise Act. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, had no liquor in his conscious possession, and was implicated only through a confession made by another accused, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He further contended 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, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.15,000 bond with two sureties and subject to verification of his criminal antecedent, directing that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the IPC and Excise Act.
- Whether a confession made by a co‑accused in police custody can be the basis to deny bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act removing the doctrine of deemed possession on the bail application.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the Bihar Non‑Commercial Sale of Substances Act can be invoked to impose conditions on anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(2), 32(3), 36, 41(i), 42(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 272, 273, 34, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confession
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20986 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-423 Year-2023 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Awadhesh Rai Son Of Lalan Rai R/O Vill - Rampur Fago, P.S- Saraiya, Dist-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priyesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 272, 273, 420, 120(B) and 34 of the I.P.C. and Sections
30(a), 32(2), 32(3), 36, 41(i) and 42(2) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which one
case is under the Excise Act and the allegation is of recovery of
4200 litres of liquor from a tanker.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the tanker and he came to be implicated based on confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20986 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
statement of Ram Babu Rai 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. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. 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, is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Court No.II, Muzaffarpur in
connection with Saraiya P. S. Case No.423 of 2023, subject to
the conditions 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 more than
three cases 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20986 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
petitioner has antecedent of three cases only, in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…