Patna High Court
Devendra RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail with conditions, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Devendra Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged possession of large quantities of liquor. He argued that the liquor was located in a joint family house, that he had no conscious possession, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs. 500 bond with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where alleged possession is deemed rather than actual.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the concept of deemed possession for bail considerations.
- Whether the High Court can impose conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS while granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3160 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2025 Thana- Benibad District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Devendra Ray Son of Gulab Ray Resident of Bharat Nagar, P.S. - Benibad,
District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raju Kumar, Adv
Mr. Shubham Samrat, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Gauri Shankar Gupta
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 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 162.64 litres of liquor from the house of the
petitioner and 63.36 litres of liquor from a place 200 meters
away from the house of Dilip.
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 after 2018
amendment in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3160 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that 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 of the petitioner. It is further
submitted that he came to be implicated based on secret
information which is the easiest way to implicate someone
without holding a proper investigation.
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 Benibad P.S. Case No. 142 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3160 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.