Patna High Court
Abhishek KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of antecedent and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Abhishek Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act alleging recovery of liquor from a vehicle. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the seized liquor, and that the case against him is based solely on a confessional statement of a co‑accused made in police custody, which he contended lacks evidentiary value. The petitioner also highlighted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act has 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 bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused made in police custody can be the basis for denying anticipatory bail
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession on the grant of anticipatory bail
- Conditions to be imposed on provisional anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22778 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2026 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Abhishek Kumar S/o- Raja Ram Sah R/v- Balua Ps- Jalalpur Dist- Saran at
Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 354.96 litres of liquor from a Bolero vehicle
along with 10 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
any of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Anand in police custody, which does
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22778 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that after
Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Baniyapur P. S. Case No.67 of 2026, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22778 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…