Patna High Court
Sanoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanoj Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging recovery of 27 litres of liquor from a vehicle, alleged offences under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act. He contended he had a clean antecedent, was not the owner of the seized vehicle, and that the only basis for his implication was a confessional statement of an apprehended co‑accused, which he argued lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner also argued that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and two sureties, and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court, with confirmation if he is found clean and cancellation if any prior case is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Excise Act based on the facts presented.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender for the purpose of bail.
- Whether a confessional statement of an apprehended co‑accused can constitute sufficient ground for arrest and denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31515 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2026 Thana- RATWARA District- Madhepura
======================================================
Sanoj Kumar S/o Pramod Singh @ Parmanand Singh R/o Village- Piparpanti,
P.S.- Ratwara, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Pooja Prasad, Adv
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
41 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 27 litres of liquor from a car.
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 is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of apprehended-accused in police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31515 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
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 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 Ratwara P.S. Case No. 14 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31515 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
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.