Patna High Court
Dinesh Yadav @ Dinesh Kumar YadavversusThe 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 and compliance with the stipulated bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, alleging recovery of 72 litres of liquor. He argued that he was not caught in possession, the alleged recovery occurred at a location not belonging to him, and the case relied on a confessional statement of an accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.5,000 bail bond with two sureties and ordered verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks; if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the alleged offences under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement of an accused in police custody can form the basis for arrest.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender on bail considerations.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 274, 275, 3(5), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482
- Bihar law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29619 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2025 Thana- LAUKAHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Dinesh Yadav @ Dinesh Kumar Yadav S/o Ramavtar Yadav Resident of
Village - Tulsiyahi, P.S - Laukahi, District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sangeeta Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 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 Sections 274, 275
and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 72 liters of liquor from a sack.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29619 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
apprehended accused in police custody which does not have any
evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in
the excise act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with.
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.
5000/- (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 Laukahi
P.S. Case No. 214 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29619 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
antecedent of one case only, in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…