Patna High Court
Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Mithu Sahni applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 501 litres of liquor from a straw house belonging to Krishna Mohan. The petitioner argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, that the alleged recovery occurred at a place not owned by him, and that the only link to him was a confessional statement made by Krishna Mohan while in police custody, which the petitioner contended lacks evidentiary value. He further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, weakening the prosecution's case. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
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, including verification of antecedent cases.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- Section 438 CrPC
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23525 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- MAHINDWARA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumar son of Suresh Sahni @ Naresh Sahni Resident
of Village- Koahi PS- Mahindwara District - Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 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 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 501 litres of liquor from a straw
house of Krishna Mohan.
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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner has no concern or relation with Krishna Mohan
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23525 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Krishna Mohan in police custody, which does not have any
evidentiary value. It is further 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.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 Mahindwara P. S. Case No.31 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 more than two cases,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23525 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
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 two cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…