Patna High Court
Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly possessing 110 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle and a house. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, did not have conscious possession, was not the owner of the vehicle, and that the house was joint family property, making it uncertain that he concealed the liquor. He also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stipulating that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail may not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in view of the alleged possession of liquor.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged antecedent cases affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- joint family property
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39887 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2026 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sonu Kumar S/o Lalan Rai @ Lalan Ray R/o Vill- Shitalpur, Baradih, P.S.-
Chakia, Distt- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 110 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle and a house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and the house in question is a joint family
property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was
the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39887 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/3
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 the villager but then it is submitted that it does
not appear probable that villager would have known who had
concealed the liquor in the house.
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.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen 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 Chakia P.S. Case
No. 149 of 2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39887 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
3/3
three cases, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed
his 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 three cases 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.