Patna High Court
Sandeep Sao @ Sandeep KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, under the conditions prescribed.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandeep Sao, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 24 litres of liquor from an auto. He contended that he was not arrested on the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Sumantiya Devi in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. He further submitted that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, rendering the prosecution’s basis weak. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the alleged offence is under the Bihar Excise Act and the accused claims lack of possession and reliance on a confessional statement.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act on the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS are sufficient to justify provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- provisional bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28224 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE SHERGHATI District- Gaya
======================================================
Sandeep Sao @ Sandeep Kumar S/o Devnandan Sao R/o Village- Nawadih
Panari, PS- Hanterganj, Dist- Chatra, Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Rabindra Kumar.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 24 litres of liquor from an Auto.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
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
confessional statement of Sumantiya Devi in police custody
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28224 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
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 further submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,
local person, confessional statement or secret information
without holding a proper investigation.
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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds 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 Excise Sherghati P.S.
Case No. 173 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
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.28224 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…