Patna High Court
Anil RavidasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent record.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Ravidas, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 30(a) and 47 of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 46.5 litres of liquor from a Toto vehicle. He argued that he was not caught in possession, was not the owner of the vehicle, and that the only evidence against him was a confessional statement made by a co‑accused in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. He further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted a provisional anticipatory bail order, subject to a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and a condition that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents within six weeks; if more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed, otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Excise Act where the accused is not found in possession of the liquor.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused made in police custody is admissible as evidence for granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act has eliminated the doctrines of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a), 47
- Bihar Negotiable Sale of Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- confessional statement
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31837 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE PAKRIBARAWAN District-
Nawada
======================================================
Anil Ravidas S/o Ramchandra Ravidas R/o Village- Lalpur, PS- Kawakol,
Distt.- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammed Arif
======================================================
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
47 of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 46.5 liters of liquor from a Toto vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the seized vehicle he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Pramod in police custody which does
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31837 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/3
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 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.
5000/- (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 Excise
Pakaribarawan P.S. Case No. 193 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31837 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.