Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bond, sureties and verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Nitish Kumar and Mukesh Kumar Rai, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 2,384 litres of liquor from a DCM vehicle. They argued they have clean antecedents, were not in possession of the seized liquor, and were implicated solely on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody, which they claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the filing of bail bonds and sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents before confirming the bail. The order also warned that any concealment of prior cases would lead to the bail being withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused made in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 41
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31123 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2025 Thana- GAUTAMBUDHNAGAR District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Nitish Kumar S/o Chandra Keshwar Rai R/o Village - Raypur Bindgawa,
P.S. - Doriganj, Dist. - Saran at Chapra.
2. Mukesh Kumar Rai @ Mukesh Kumar S/o Parma Rai R/o Village - Raypur
Bindgawa, P.S. - Doriganj, Dist. - Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Alok
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar
======================================================
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 Sections 30(a) and
41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 2384 litres of liquor from a DCM vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and are not the
owners of the seized vehicle and they came to be implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31123 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
based on confessional statement of Ranjan in police custody
which does not have any 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.
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 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 G.B Nagar P.S. Case No. 72 of 2025, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31123 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his
criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is
found that petitioners are 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…