Patna High Court
Satish Singh @ Satish Kumar Singh @ Sati SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Sections 438(2) Cr.P.C. and 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Satish Singh, sought anticipatory bail after learning of a pending case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act involving alleged recovery of liquor from a motorcycle and a sack. He argued that he was not in actual possession at the time of seizure, was not the owner of the vehicle or sack, and that the case was based solely on a confessional statement made in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. He further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S., directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent before confirming the bail. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act when the accused was not in possession at the time of seizure
- Whether a confessional statement made by an accused in police custody can be the basis for denying anticipatory bail
- Whether the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender are applicable after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act
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
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33975 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-808 Year-2023 Thana- MANER District- Patna
======================================================
Satish Singh @ Satish Kumar Singh @ Sati Singh S/o Late Kankar Singh R/o
Sherpur, P.S.- Maner, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kanchan Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and 20 litres of
liquor from a sack.
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 petitioner is neither the owner of the seized vehicle nor he
has any concern with the sack in question and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33975 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
and he came to be implicated based on the confessional
statement of apprehended accused in police custody which does
not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law. 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 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 Maner P.S. Case
No. 808 of 2023, 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33975 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
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.