Patna High Court
Niraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
Niraj Kumar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with offences under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act, alleging that liquor was recovered from a motorcycle he did not own and that the case against him rests on a confessional statement of another accused, which he claims lacks evidentiary value. He 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 Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. The court stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Excise Act where the accused is not in immediate possession of the contraband.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused, made in police custody, can be relied upon to deny bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act removing the doctrine of deemed possession on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41(1)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32184 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1273 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- East Champaran
======================================================
Niraj Kumar S/o Dayal Paswan R/o Village - Malkauniya, P.S - Dhaka,
District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Suman Kumari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 45 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Pritam Kumar in police custody,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32184 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted
that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of
deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away
with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 P. S. Case No.1273 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32184 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.