Patna High Court
Tarkeshwar Chaudhary @ BalkeshwarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Tarkeshwar Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, alleging recovery of liquor and Mahua from his house and another's house. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and the property is a joint family house, making it uncertain that he stored the liquor. He further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and that his implication was based on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, directing verification of his criminal antecedent to confirm the order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession affects the bail consideration
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Substance (BNSS) Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2391 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2025 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Tarkeshwar Chaudhary @ Balkeshwar Son of Late Rama Chaudhary Resident
of Benaut, P.S.- Rasulpur, District- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 20 litres of liquor along with 500 litres of Mahua
Pass from the house of the petitioner and 100 litres of Mahua
Pass from the house of Vakil Chaudhary.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2391 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
2/3
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 in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on the
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Rasulpur
P.S. Case No. 187 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2391 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
3/3
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to
deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the Advocate Association
of the Patna High Court within a period of two weeks from
today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.