Patna High Court
Bachche Nadaf @ Mohammad Ishad @ Md. Ishad @ BachcheversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to bond and verification conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Bachche Nadaf (also known as Mohammad Ishad), was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 10.95 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he was not arrested at the scene, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act. The State opposed the anticipatory bail application. The High Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and deposit Rs.5,000 with the Advocates’ Association. The order also stipulated that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and could withdraw bail if more than three prior cases are found.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the abolition of the deemed possession concept affects the petitioner’s liability.
- Whether lack of conscious possession and the joint family nature of the property justify bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent (more than three prior cases) should preclude anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2307 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE PUPRI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Bachche Nadaf @ Mohammad Ishad @ Md. Ishad @ Bachche S/o Md.
Moslim Resident of Village- Mahisautha, Ward No.14, P.S.- Bokhra, Dist-
Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 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 has antecedent of three cases as per the
supplementary affidavit and allegation is of recovery of 10.95
litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
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 even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2307 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 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 the name of the person, who disclosed the
name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. M It is next
submitted that police in majority of cases implicating innocent
persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret
information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner
without holding a proper investigation.
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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2307 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
in connection with Pupri Excise P. S. Case No.264 of 2025,
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 more than three
cases, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the
purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if
on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of
three cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner based on instruction submits that
petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- with
Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court, Patna.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…