Patna High Court
Abdhesh Yadav @ Avdesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Abdhesh Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 8.250 litres of liquor from his residence. He argued that he was not arrested at the scene, the liquor was located in a joint family house, and there was no conscious possession, contending that the post‑2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession. He also suggested that the complaint was motivated by an inimical relationship with the reporting chaukidar. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.5,000 bail bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, stating that the bail could be withdrawn if more than one prior case is found. The order was made subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession applies after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27075 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2025 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN District-
Darbhanga
======================================================
Abdhesh Yadav @ Avdesh Yadav S/O Jiwan Yadav Resident of Village-
Tarso, P.S- Kusheshwar Asthan, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjit Kumar Yadav
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 8.250 litres of liquor from house
of the petitioner.
4. 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 even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27075 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of
Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is further
submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the
petitioners in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the
police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. 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.5,000/- (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 Kusheshwar Asthan P. S. Case No.394 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27075 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
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 one case, 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 one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…