Patna High Court
Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly storing 216.36 litres of liquor in a toilet tank at his joint‑family house. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted arrest. The Court, considering the clean antecedent and lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner surrender within six weeks, furnish bail bonds and sureties, and that the trial court verify his antecedent before confirming the bail. The order is subject to Section 482(2) of the BNSS and may be revoked if any prior case is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the alleged liquor is not in the accused's conscious possession.
- Whether the 2018 amendment eliminating deemed possession and presumed offender applies to the present facts.
- Whether the joint‑family nature of the property affects the liability of the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38826 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Raushan Kumar Son of Ranjeet Prasad Resident of Village- Tarma, P.S.-
Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Priyesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-06-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 216.36 liters of liquor from a toilet tank built in
courtyard of the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38826 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
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. It is further submitted that petitioner
came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar, but then it
is submitted that it does not appear probable that Chowkidar
would have known who had concealed the liquor in the house. It
is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
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, 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 Kanti
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38826 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
P.S. Case No. 31 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 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 in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case
then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.