Patna High Court
Anil Sah @ Anil Kumar SoniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Sah, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 123.75 litres of liquor from a vehicle, though he was not in immediate possession and was not the owner of the vehicle. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement made by a co-accused, Nanhak, while in police custody, which the petitioner’s counsel argued lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner, who has a clean antecedent, sought anticipatory bail, contending 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, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, with the order to be confirmed if the antecedent remains clean.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of the co-accused made in police custody can be the basis for arrest.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Excise Act eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32432 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2025 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Anil Sah @ Anil Kumar Soni S/o Prasad Sah Resident of village - Sisahani,
P.S.- Pakaridayal, Distt.- 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 : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-05-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 123.750 liters of liquor from a car.
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 and came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Nanhak in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32432 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
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.
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
Pakaridayal P.S. Case No. 153 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 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.32432 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.