Patna High Court
Rohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bail bond, surety, and antecedent verification conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Rohit and Rahul Kumar, were accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged possession of large quantities of liquor recovered from a joint family house. They argued they had no conscious possession, the property was jointly owned, and the amendment of 2018 had abolished the concept of deemed possession, rendering the charge untenable, especially as the case relied on a confessional statement of another accused which lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed their request for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioners furnish bail bonds of Rs. 500 each with two sureties and that the trial court verify their criminal antecedents within six weeks. If any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; if they are found to have a clean record, the provisional bail will be confirmed. The petitioners were also directed to deposit Rs. 1,500 with the Lawyers’ Association within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where alleged possession is not proven and the charge is based solely on a confessional statement.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing the concept of deemed possession affects the liability of the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent status justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4037 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-586 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Rohit Kumar S/O Deena Lal Jaiswal Resident of Village- Madhubani Ghat,
P.S- Muffasil, Dist.- Motihari at East Champaran
2. Rahul Kumar S/O Deena Lal Jaiswal Resident of Village- Madhubani Ghat,
P.S- Muffasil, Dist.- Motihari at East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 8.560 liters of liquor from house of Shantlal Jaiswal
and 112.8 liters of liquor from house of petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession and the house in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4037 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it were petitioners who had kept the liquor in
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within their
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 they came to be implicated based
on confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their 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) each 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 Mufassil
P.S. Case No. 586 of 2025 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 petitioners and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4037 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
in the event if it is found that any of the petitioners have
antecedent of even one case then it would be presumed that
petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had
concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but
after verification if it is found that petitioners are persons with
clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the
petitioners, based on instruction, undertakes to deposit an
amount of Rs. 1500/- with Lawyers’ Association, Patna High
Court within a period of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…