Patna High Court
Vikash RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Vikash Ram sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 alleging that 231.335 litres of liquor were recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He argued that no liquor was seized from his personal possession, that the concept of deemed possession had been removed by the 2018 amendment, and that the case was based solely on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order is subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender applies post‑2018 amendment.
- Whether the joint family nature of the property negates personal possession for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- excise law
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25538 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2026 Thana- RAJPUR District- Buxar
======================================================
Vikash Ram S/O Hela @ Rajendra Ram R/O Vill.- Gajadhara, P.S.- Rajpur,
Dist.- Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dr. Kamal Deo Sharma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali
======================================================
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, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 231.335 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.25538 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 based on secret information
which is the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a
proper investigation.
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 Rajpur P.S. Case No.77/2026, 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25538 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
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…