Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Mahto @ Naresh MahatoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

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

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


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.