Patna High Court
Sanjeet PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjeet Paswan, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging recovery of 20.25 litres of liquor from a joint family house. He argued he had a clean antecedent, was not arrested at the scene, and that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, especially since the 2018 amendment removed the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if none, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 where alleged possession is disputed.
- Whether the removal of the concept of deemed possession by the 2018 amendment affects the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants provisional anticipatory bail pending verification.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- liquor possession
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36869 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-546 Year-2025 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sanjeet Paswan S/o Virchandra Paswan R/o Village - Sandho Basudeo, P.S -
Goraul, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Shilpa Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 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, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 20.25 litres of liquor from house of Amarjeet. 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 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36869 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/2
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 Goraul P.S.
Case No.546 of 2025, 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 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.