Patna High Court
Bittu Kumar Yadav @ Bittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, to be confirmed only if he is found to have a clean criminal record.
Summary
The petitioner, Bittu Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly recovering 172.8 litres of liquor from a truck. He argued he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, was not the truck’s owner, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Mukesh while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner 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 High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs 500 bail bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the order to be confirmed only if the antecedent check proved a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement made in police custody is admissible as evidence to justify denial of bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender on the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- Section 482
- clean antecedent
- high court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22072 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-18 Year-2026 Thana- EXCISE JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Bittu Kumar Yadav @ Bittu Kumar S/o Jabir Yadav R/o Vill. - Kuruthia, P.S.-
Bagen Gola, Distt - Buxar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 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.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 172.8 liters of liquor from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the seized truck and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Mukesh in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22072 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
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 for the petitioner, 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. 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 Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 18 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 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 has clean antecedent, in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22072 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.