Patna High Court
Vicki Kumar Singh @ Krishna Murti SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Petitioners Vicki Kumar Singh and Himanshu Singh applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 38 and 41(i) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 3010.14 litres of liquor and a vehicle. They argued they have no prior criminal record, were not in actual possession of the seized items, and the case is based solely on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody, which they contend lacks evidentiary value, especially after the 2018 amendment removing the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioners furnish bail bonds of Rs.500 each with two sureties and that the trial court verify their antecedents, revoking bail if any prior case is found. The order is subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged offences under the Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody can be the basis for denying bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act removing the concept of deemed possession on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 38, 41(i)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21003 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
1. Vicki Kumar Singh @ Krishna Murti Singh S/o Arun Kumar Singh @ Arun
Singh R/o vill- Kalyanpur, PO and PS- Durgawati, Distt.- Kaimur Bhabhua
2. Himanshu Singh @ Himanshu Raj S/o Akhilesh Singh R/o vill - Saray, P.S.-
Ramgarh, Distt.- Kaimur at Bhabhua
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ankita Roy
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a), 38 and 41(i) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the
allegation is of recovery of 3010.14 litres of liquor from the
house adjacent to tube-well along with one Magic pick-up
vehicle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21003 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a house which does not belong to the
petitioners, nor are owner of the seized vehicle and they came to
be implicated based on confessional statement of Avinash in
police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is
also submitted that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 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 petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum 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 Ramgarh P. S. Case No.396 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21003 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioners shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event,
if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case,
then it would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed their antecedent
before this Court, in that event, the present provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on
verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…