Patna High Court
Sudhir Kumar Yadav @ Sudhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is allowed, granting provisional bail subject to verification of antecedents and conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Sudhir Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act, involving the recovery of 1,803 litres of liquor and a vehicle. He argued that he was not in actual possession of the seized items, that the allegation rested on a confessional statement of another accused, and that the amendment to the Excise Act, 2018 had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. If more than two prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only two are found, the provisional order will be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC to a person alleged to have committed offences under the Excise Act despite prior antecedents.
- Whether the amendment to the Excise Act, 2018 eliminating deemed possession and presumed offender affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether provisional bail can be conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23580 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2025 Thana- NIRMALI District- Supaul
======================================================
Sudhir Kumar Yadav @ Sudhir Kumar Son of Satyanarayan Yadav Resident
of Village- Belhi, Ward No. 9, P.S.- Kishanpur, District- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amrit Abhijat
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kumar
======================================================
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
Sections 30(a) and 41(1) 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 1803 litres of liquor from a truck
along with a Scorpio vehicle.
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 apprehended accused in police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23580 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also
submitted that his father Hemant Himanshu was also arrested
and he was made to confess the name of the petitioner since he
was having antecedent under the Excise from before. It is next
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 Nirmali P. S. Case No.229 of 2025, corresponding to S.T.
Excise No.4662 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23580 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
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,
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…