Patna High Court
Ghanshyam RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions and verification of antecedents, with confirmation only if the petitioners are found to have clean records.
Summary
The petitioners, Ghanshyam Ray and Nageshwar Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 26.64 litres of liquor from a joint family house. They argued they have clean antecedents, were not apprehended at the spot, and that the concept of deemed possession was abolished after the 2018 amendment, making the allegations untenable. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed for that petitioner, but would be confirmed if they are found to have clean records.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the post‑2018 amendment abolishing deemed possession and presumed offender concepts defeats the prosecution’s case.
- Whether the joint family nature of the property negates the allegation of possession by petitioner No.2.
- Whether the petitioners’ clean antecedent status influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30822 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2026 Thana- CHACKMEHSI District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Ghanshyam Ray Son of Baleshwar Ray Resident of Village- Gorai Ghaat,
P.S.- Chakmehsi, District- Samastipur
2. Nageshwar Mahto @ Nago Mahto Son of Late Kewal Mahto Resident of
Village- Gorai Ghaat, P.S.- Chakmehsi, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 26.64 liters of liquor from house of petitioner no. 2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession and the house in
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30822 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was petitioner no. 2 who had kept the
liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after amendment in the excise act in the year
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and they came to be implicated at the
instance of Chowkidar with whom they are on an inimical term.
It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is
further submitted that petitioner no. 1 has no concern or relation
with petitioner no. 2.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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.
500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30822 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
Chakmehsi P.S. Case No. 32 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 petitioners and
in the event if it is found that any of the petitioners have
antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that
petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had
concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with
respect to that petitioner who had concealed his antecedent, but
after verification if it is found that petitioners are persons with
clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…