Patna High Court
Bithal Saw @ Indrajeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of his antecedent by the trial court.
Summary
The petitioner, Bithal Saw (Indrajeet Kumar), sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 47(a) and (f) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 35 litres of liquor and 690 litres of Jawa Mahua from his residence, which is a joint family property. He argued he has a clean antecedent, that no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender. He also contended that the watchman who reported the incident was hostile towards him and should have informed police earlier if aware of any involvement. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under the Bihar Excise Act alleging possession of liquor and Jawa Mahua.
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21095 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2015 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
District- Nawada
======================================================
Bithal Saw @ Indrajeet Kumar Son of Virendra Saw Resident of Village -
Rasanpur, P.S.- Warisaliganj, District - Nawadah.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 47(a) and
(F) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 35 liters of liquor along with 690 liters of Jawa
Mahua from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21095 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
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 and he came to be implicated at the
instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It
is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR
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 petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his 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) 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 G.O Case
No. 256 of 2015 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21095 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
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 even one case
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 petitioner is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…