Patna High Court
Kailu SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Kailu Sah, was implicated under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 26.650 liters of liquor recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and the concept of deemed possession had been removed by the 2018 amendment. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is discovered, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing the concept of deemed possession on the prosecution's case
- Whether the joint family nature of the property precludes attribution of possession to the petitioner
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42119 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2026 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria
======================================================
Kailu Sah Son of Late Kishori Sah Resident of Village- Mirdaul, Ward No. 7,
P.S.- Narpatganj, District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammed Arif
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 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 26.650 liters of liquor from 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
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42119 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
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 he came to be implicated based on
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone without holding a proper investigation.
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
Narpatganj P.S. Case No. 195 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42119 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
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.