Patna High Court
Dhanesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhanesh Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 7 litres of liquor. He argued that the liquor was located in a joint‑family house, he had no conscious possession, and the only evidence was a confessional statement made by Sunil while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, contending the offence was cognizable. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court, invoking Sections 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and 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. The petitioner also undertook to deposit a further amount with the Patna High Court Advocate Association.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Whether the concept of deemed possession applies after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Substance (BNSS) Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3344 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2025 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Dhanesh Rai Son of Late Lilaku Rai @ Liluk Rai Resident of Village- Jethuli,
P.S.- Nadi, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuri Lata, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 7 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
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
was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3344 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
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 based on the
confessional statement of Sunil in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law.
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, let 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 PTN
1657 of 2025 arising out of Nadi P.S. Case No. 281 of 2025,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3344 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
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 is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to
deposit an amount of Rs.1,500/- with the Advocate Association
of the Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…