Patna High Court
Vikash Yadav @ Vikash Prasad YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted in the absence of proof of actual possession, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Vikash Yadav (in two petitions) applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in excise cases alleging recovery of 1,075.68 litres of liquor. He contended he was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the seized vehicle, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of another person made in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. He further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, making the prosecution’s case weak. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and conditionally confirm the bail if the antecedent does not exceed the specified limit.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offence is based on presumed possession without actual recovery from the accused
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody can be the sole basis for denying anticipatory bail
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act on the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender for bail considerations
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent should affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 36, 41(2)
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act — s. 111(i), 111(ii), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21142 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Champanagar District- Purnia
======================================================
Vikash Yadav @ Vikash Kumar Son of Binod Yadav R/o vill- Maranga, west
ward no. 8, P.S.- Maranga, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21178 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Champanagar District- Purnia
======================================================
Vikash Yadav @ Vikash Prasad Yadav Son of Basudev Yadav R/o vill-
Lasanpur Bauri, Oli Lasanpur, Thana- Dagarua, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21142 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Renuka Ratnakar (App 125)
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 21178 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-05-2026 Re:- Cr. Misc No. 21142 of 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
111(i)/111(ii) of the BNS Sections 30(a), 36 and 41(2) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21142 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/5
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of fourteen cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 1075.68 litres of liquor from a
vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Ajit 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. It is further submitted that once an accused is implicated in
a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating
mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person,
confessional statement or secret information without holding a
proper investigation.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21142 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/5
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
70,000/- (Rupees Seventy 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
Champanagar P.S. Case No. 27 of 2026, subject to the
conditions as 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 fourteen 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 petitioner has antecedent of
fourteen cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Cr. Misc No. 21178 of 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21142 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
4/5
111(i)/111(ii) of the BNS Sections 30(a), 36 and 41(2) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 1075.68 litres of liquor from a
vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Ajit 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. It is further submitted that once an accused is implicated in
a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating
mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person,
confessional statement or secret information without holding a
proper investigation.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21142 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
5/5
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.
25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-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
Champanagar P.S. Case No. 27 of 2026, subject to the
conditions as 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 five 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 petitioner has antecedent of five
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.