Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail, subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that 35 litres of liquor were recovered from his joint family house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, that the property is jointly owned, and that the concept of deemed possession was removed by the 2018 amendment. He also claimed the complaint was motivated by an inimical relationship with the chowkidar who lodged the FIR. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents; if more than one prior case is found, the bail may be withdrawn, otherwise it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022?
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a joint family house establishes possession sufficient to deny anticipatory bail?
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- joint family property
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33216 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2026 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Sahani S/o Sharma Sahani @ Sharma Sahni R/o Ward
No. 06, Derwa Malahi Tola, P.S. - Kesariya, Distt. - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Rathore Alias Kundan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 35 litres of liquor from the house of
the petitioner apart from other recoveries as detailed in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33216 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and
presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of
the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also
submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement
of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform
the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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.5,000/- (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 Kesariya P.S. Case
No. 155 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33216 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.