Patna High Court
Chuman YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedents.
Summary
Petitioner Chuman Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of liquor from a river bank, a motorcycle and sacks, none of which were in his conscious possession. He argued that the only evidence was a confessional statement of an accomplice made in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties of the same amount, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if the petitioner is found to have a clean record, the bail will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody can be relied upon for granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, removed by the 2018 amendment, affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26488 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2026 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Chuman Yadav S/o- Jeetan Yadav R/v- Dumri W.No-2, Ps- Majhauliya Dist-
West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
30(d) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 15 litres of liquor from bank of Dumri river and 50
litres of liquor from a motorcycle and two sacks. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even
alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioner and is accessible to villagers at large and is not the
owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26488 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
on confessional statement of Gulshan in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that
and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with.
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.500/- (Rupees five hundred) 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 Majhauliya P.S. Case No.190/2026, 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 even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26488 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…