Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, with the order to be confirmed only if the petitioner has at most two prior cases.
Summary
Rohit Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, where 99 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from a scooty. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested at the scene, had no conscious possession of the scooty, and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Laldip Kumar in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. He 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 High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents, revoking the bail if more than two prior cases are found. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the alleged offender has two prior excise cases.
- Whether a confessional statement made by a third person in police custody can form the basis for anticipatory bail denial.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act on the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28935 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-316 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Rohit Kumar Son of Shivsharan Ram Resident of Village - Lalbandi Darbar,
Ward No. 04, P.S.- Sonbarsa, District - Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Birendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 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 two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 99 litres of liquor from a scooty.
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 scooty and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Laldip Kumar in police custody,
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28935 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
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.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 Sonbarsa P. S. Case No.316 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 two cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28935 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
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 two cases, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…