Patna High Court
Ankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
Ankaj Kumar, a resident of a joint family house in Lakhisarai, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 10 litres of liquor recovered from his home. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, that no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender. The petitioner contended that the liquor could belong to other family members and questioned why the watchman did not inform police earlier. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender applies post the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether joint family ownership of the premises negates the presumption of possession by the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.289 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-292 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Ankaj Kumar S/O Ram Vilash Paswan @ Vilash Paswan R/O Village-
Dhanauri, P.S.-Surajgarha, District- Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md Shadab Alam Wazdi
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
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 after 2018
amendment in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession
and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that the house in question is a joint family property as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.289 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner
who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the
house was within knowledge of the petitioner and he came to be
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar but then it is submitted
that if the Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the
petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the
police prior to institution of the instant FIR, which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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.
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
Suryagarha P.S. Case No. 292 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 even one case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.289 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
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 is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…