Patna High Court
Bipin ChaudharyversusThe 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 dependent on the antecedent check.
Summary
The petitioner, Bipin Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 21,400 litres of liquor from a washroom in a joint family house. He argued that no liquor was found in his conscious possession, the property is jointly owned, and the 2018 amendment abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The FIR did not disclose the informant, raising doubts about the basis of the accusation. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, with confirmation contingent on finding no more than two prior cases.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances alleged.
- Whether the absence of conscious possession and joint family ownership negates the charge under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the lack of disclosure of the informant in the FIR affects the validity of the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- CrPC Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22550 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2026 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Bipin Chaudhary S/O Balam Chaudhary @ Blam Choudhary R/o Vill.-
Chamardiha, Ward No.13, P.S - Rajgir, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra 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 Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 21.400 litres of liquor from
washroom of the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner
was not arrested 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22550 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of
deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away
with and he came to be implicated at the instance of local
person but then the name of person who disclosed the name of
petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion
on the case of the prosecution as petitioner was not implicated
based on secret information. 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.10,000/- (Rupees ten 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 Rajgir P.S. Case No.64/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22550 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
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
two cases, 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 two
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…