Patna High Court
Nilesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Nilesh Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 111(i) and 111(ii) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 30(a), 36 and 41(2) of the Excise Act, relating to the alleged recovery of 1,075.68 litres of liquor from a Mahindra pick‑up. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the vehicle’s owner, and that the only basis for his implication was a confessional statement made by Ajeet Kumar while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and that his five prior Excise cases should not preclude bail. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than five prior cases are found, the bail may be withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted for offences under Sections 111(i), 111(ii) of the BNSS and Sections 30(a), 36, 41(2) of the Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody has evidentiary value for denying bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act removing deemed possession and presumed offender on bail considerations.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of five cases bars the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 111(i), 111(ii), 482(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 36, 41(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- BNSS
- liquor seizure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25590 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- Champanagar District- Purnia
======================================================
Nilesh Kumar Son of Upendra Mandal @ Upendra Prasad Mandal Resident
of Village- Vikash Nagar ward no. 11, P.S.- Maranga, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in
a case registered for the offences punishable under Section
111(i), 111(ii), of the B.N.S. and Sections 30(a), 36, 41(2) of the
Excise Act.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 1075.68 litres of liquor from a
mahindra pick-up vehicle.
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
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25590 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
confessional statement of Ajeet Kumar in police custody, which
does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that
after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of
deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away
with. It is next submitted that police in majority of cases
implicating innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar,
local person, secret information and confessional statement in a
mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation.
Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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 Champanagar P. S. Case No.27 of 2026, subject
to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
The application stands allowed.
It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25590 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026
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 five 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 five cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…