Patna High Court
Shubham Kumar @ Shubham PatelversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Shubham Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, alleging recovery of 413.840 litres of liquor from a bush. He contended that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and the alleged recovery occurred on land not owned by him. The petition relied on a confessional statement made by another individual in police custody, which the petitioner argued lacks evidentiary value, and asserted that the 2018 amendment abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible for arrest in the present case.
- Whether the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender apply post the 2018 amendment of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent exceeding two cases bars the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26669 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-373 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Shubham Kumar @ Shubham Patel Son of Laxman Prasad @ Laxman Patel
Resident of village - Sihorawa, Police Station - Jadopur (Yadopur), District -
Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases out of which one case is
under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 413.840
litres of liquor from a bush.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26669 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
petitioner came to be implicated based on the confessional
statement of Shubham Patel in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. It is next submitted
that 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 also submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise the police start
implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten 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 Gopalganj
Excise P.S. Case No. 373 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26669 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
B.N.S.S.
7. However, 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 two
cases, 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 two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…