Patna High Court
Uttam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedents and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Uttam Kumar, a resident of Salarpur, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged alleging that 1.875 litres of liquor were recovered from his house, violating Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The petitioner argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, the property is jointly owned, and the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegation was sufficient to proceed. The court, noting the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the lack of direct evidence of possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The trial court was directed to verify the petitioner’s antecedents and confirm the bail if no prior cases are found; otherwise, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender affects the applicability of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38891 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2026 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria
======================================================
Uttam Kumar S/o Shambhu Singh Resident of Village- Salarpur, Ward No.
10, P.S.- Parbatta, District- Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 1.875 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
within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38891 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
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 chowkidar but then it is submitted that it does
not appear probable that would have known who has concealed
liquor in the house or else he would have informed the police
prior to institution of the instant FIR.
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 Parbatta P.S. Case No.155/2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38891 of 2026(2) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
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.