Patna High Court
Arjun SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Arjun Singh was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for allegedly possessing 204.300 litres of liquor recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He contended that he has a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the scene, and that the liquor could not be conclusively linked to him, especially since the concept of deemed possession was removed by the 2018 amendment and the informant’s name was omitted from the FIR. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the prosecution’s case was weak. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents before confirming the bail. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 when the accused was not arrested at the spot and the property is jointly owned.
- Whether the removal of the concept of deemed possession by the 2018 amendment affects the prosecution’s case.
- Whether the absence of the informant’s name in the FIR undermines the charge.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 — s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35118 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2018 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Arjun Singh S/o Late Chhotan Singh R/o Village - Darbey, P.S - Bhadaur,
District - Patna / Hemchachak Nagar, P.S - Barh, District - Patna. At present
R/o - Gandhi High School Road, Jhumari Tilaiya, P.S - Jhumari Tilaiya,
District - Kodarma, State - Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Sharma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-06-2026 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
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 204.300 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner.
It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot
as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession
and the house in question is a joint family property as such it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner, who had
kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35118 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
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 and he came to be implicated
at the instance of local person but then the name of the person
who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the
FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution,
when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.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 Barh P.S. Case No.31/2018, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35118 of 2026(3) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification 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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.