Patna High Court
Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Mahto @ Naresh MahatoversusThe 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 bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Naresh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging that 5.4 litres of liquor were recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, had a clean criminal record, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the alleged offence warranted arrest. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender precludes arrest in the present facts.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- deemed possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30001 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2026 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Mahto @ Naresh Mahato S/o Bhanu Mahto R/o
Village- Panapur Bangla Tola, PS- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Preety Kunwar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 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 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 5.4 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 the house in
question is a joint family property as 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30001 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
of the petitioner. 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 and
he came to be implicated at the instance of local people, but
then it is submitted that it does not appear probable that local
person would have known who had concealed the liquor in the
house, which amply demonstrates that police in mechanical
manner investigates and implicates, when petitioner admittedly
is a person with clean antecedent.
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 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 Minapur P.S. Case No. 94 of 2026, 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.30001 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.