Patna High Court
Sarju Sharma @ Saryug SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the petitioner having no more than one prior case.
Summary
The petitioner, Sarju Sharma, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged recovery of 17 litres of liquor from a location not belonging to him. He argued that no liquor was found in his possession, the recovery was from a public area, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of another person, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He further 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 granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, with the bail to be confirmed only if he has at most one prior case.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co-accused can form the sole basis for arrest.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment on the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22244 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2026 Thana- DANDKHORA District- Katihar
======================================================
Sarju Sharma @ Saryug Sharma Son of Laxmi Sharma Resident of Village-
Bhamraili, P.S.- Dandkhora, District- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 17 litres of liquor from a place near
a bamboo orchard. It is next submitted that petitioner was not
arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his
conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place
which does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible to
villagers at large and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Manoj in police custody which does
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22244 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
not have any evidentiary value. It is also 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 also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a
case relating to excise, the police starts implicating
mechanically either through chowkidar, local person,
confessional statement or secret information without holding a
proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. 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.5000/- (Rupees five thousands) 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 Dandkhora P.S. Case No.33/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22244 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…