Patna High Court
Anup KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Anup Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 126.27 litres of liquor from his residence and nearby premises. He contended that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the house is joint family property, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, applying Section 482(2) of the BNSS, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if the trial court finds more than one prior case, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed forthwith. The decision reflects the court’s balancing of the petitioner’s right to liberty against the need for a thorough investigation.
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 affects the applicability of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of conscious possession and joint family ownership preclude arrest.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS empowers the High Court to grant provisional anticipatory bail pending verification of antecedents.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30857 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2026 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Anup Kumar S/o Late Ramlal Pawan R/o Village- Banshghat, PS- Chakiya,
District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Indrajeet Bhushan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 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 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 126.27 litres of liquor from the house of the
petitioner and also from nearby dry well and sewer.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30857 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge
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 based on secret information which is
the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper
investigation. It is also submitted that of late police has started
implicating accused with criminal antecedent, in cases relating
to Excise for obvious reason.
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. 5,000/- (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 Chakia (Motihari
Chakia) P.S. Case No. 91 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30857 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
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
antecedent of one case 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.