Digamber Nat @ Guddu NatversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40564 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2026 Thana- JALALPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Digamber Nat @ Guddu Nat S/ O Late Dharma Nath Nat R/O Village -
                 Mangolapur, P.s - Jalalpur, District - Saran

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Sanjeet Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   24-06-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad.

                             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 the

                   petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and

                   allegation is of recovery of 22 litres of liquor from the house of

                   the petitioner.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40564 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
                                            2/3




          the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge

          of the petitioner. It is next submitted that after amendment in

          the Excise Act in 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 with

          whom he is on an inimical term. It is further submitted that if

          Chowkidar was aware about 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.

                   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. 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 Jalalpur P.S. Case No.

          154 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40564 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
                                                          3/3




                        shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

                        event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than

                        three cases 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 has antecedent of three cases in that event the

                        provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T