Patna High Court
Ranvijay Kumar Singh @ Ranvijay SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranvijay Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 338, 336(3), 304(2) of the B.N.S and Sections 30(a), 41(1), 33 and 34 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 800 litres of spirit from a Scorpio vehicle. He contended that he was not the owner of the vehicle, nothing was seized from his possession, and his implication rested solely on a confessional statement made by Surendra Rai in police custody, which he argued lacked evidentiary value, especially after the 2018 amendment that abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 20,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents; if more than four prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas if exactly four are found, it would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with the trial court empowered to confirm or set aside the bail after verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accusation is based solely on a confessional statement obtained in police custody.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, which removed the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, affects the petitioner’s liability.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior four cases under the Excise Act justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 33, 34, 41(1)
- B.N.S. — s. 304(2), 336(3), 338
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- bail conditions
- prior convictions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29625 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2026 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
Ranvijay Kumar Singh @ Ranvijay Singh S/o- Chitranjan Singh @ Sharma
Singh R/v- Usahari Usti Ps- Baniyapur Dist- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi
======================================================
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 Section 338,
336(3), 304(2) of the BNS and Sections 30(a), 41(1), 33, 34 of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 800 litres of spirit from a Scorpio
vehicle. It is next submitted 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 vehicle and he
came to be implicated based on the confessional statement of
Surendra Rai in police custody which does not have any
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29625 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
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. It
is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case
relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically
either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement
or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty 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 Marhowrah P.S. Case No.217/2026, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29625 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
four cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of four
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.