Patna High Court
Kamlesh Prasad @ Babloo Kumar @ Ballu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Kamlesh Prasad, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for alleged recovery of 50 litres of liquor from the Sone River. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the recovery site did not belong to him, and the case against him was based on a confessional statement of a police detainee, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He also 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 provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender affects the bail application.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible for establishing guilt.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- Cr.P.C. Section 438
- B.N.S.S. Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21009 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1043 Year-2018 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna
======================================================
Kamlesh Prasad @ Babloo Kumar @ Ballu Kumar S/O Chandeshwar Rai
R/O Village- Maudahi, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 50 litres of liquor from the bank of
Sone River.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that
petitioner came to be implicated based on the confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21009 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
statement of Nand Kishore Rai in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. 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 petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) 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 Bihta P.S. Case No.
1043 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21009 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…