Patna High Court
Dilip Ray @ Deelip KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 889.920 litres of liquor from a truck. He argued that he was not in possession of the seized goods, was not the owner of the truck, and the case was based solely on confessional statements made in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner also contended 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 on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents, with the bail to be confirmed if only one prior case is found.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act is based solely on confessional statements and the accused is not in possession of the seized goods.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act on the doctrines of deemed possession and presumed offender in bail considerations.
- What conditions should be imposed on provisional anticipatory bail pending verification of the accused's criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent verification
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27076 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-323 Year-2025 Thana- BHELDI District- Saran
======================================================
Dilip Ray @ Deelip Kumar S/o Modi Ray R/o Village- Harpur Jhakra, P.S-
Kalyanpur, Dist- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Alok
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rana Randhir Singh
======================================================
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 889.920 litres of liquor from a
truck.
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 is not the owner of
the seized truck and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Rohit and Bihari in police custody,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27076 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
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.
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 Bheldi P. S. Case No.323 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27076 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
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…