Patna High Court
Subhash Kumar @ Subhash Chandra RajanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Subhash Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 15.75 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He was not arrested at the scene and no liquor was found in his immediate possession, raising doubts about his knowledge and control over the liquor. The petitioner argued that the concept of deemed possession had been removed by the 2018 amendment and that the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR, undermining the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the anticipatory bail application. The court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of alleged possession and lack of arrest.
- Whether the removal of the deemed possession concept and the absence of the informant’s name in the FIR affect the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25314 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2026 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur
======================================================
Subhash Kumar @ Subhash Chandra Rajan S/O Suresh Prasad Azad R/O
Village- Mahuli, P.S- Rosera, Distt.- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Akela
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 15.75 litres of liquor from house of
the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not
arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his
conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family
property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was
petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor
kept in the house was within his knowledge and after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25314 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
amendment in the Excise Act in the year 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 then it is submitted that it does not appear probable that
local person would have known who had concealed liquor in the
house. It is also submitted that the name of the person who
disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution when
petitioner has not been implicated based on secret information.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5000/- (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 Rosera P.S. Case No.60/2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25314 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…