Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Suraj PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bail bonds and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Suraj Paswan, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 16,800 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act. The prosecution opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.15,000 each and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the alleged liquor was recovered from a joint family house and the petitioner was not in conscious possession.
  • Whether the abolition of the concept of deemed possession by the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act precludes the presumption of offender.
  • Whether the petitioner’s antecedent of three prior cases affects the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 30 Excise Act
  • Section 438 Cr.P.C.
  • deemed possession
  • joint family property
  • criminal antecedent
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44309 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2026 Thana- LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY
                                                    District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Suraj Paswan Son of Vishnu Paswan Resident of Village- Chunabhatti, Ward
                 No. 14, P.S.- L.N.M. University, District- Darbhanga

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr.Kumar Praveen
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-07-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

                   arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two

                   cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of

                   16.800 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in

                   question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44309 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                            2/3




          with certainty that it was the 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, 2018, the

          concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been

          done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of

          local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the

          name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts

          an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted

          that it does not appear probable that how local person would

          have known who had concealed the liquor in the house. It is

          next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating

          innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person,

          secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical

          manner without holding a proper investigation.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail

          application.

                       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 Court below

          within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the

          sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44309 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
                                                           3/3




                         of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial

                         Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection

                         with L.N.M. University P. S. Case No.98 of 2026, subject to the

                         conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                                      7. The application stands allowed.

                                      8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after

                         accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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

                         obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before

                         this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail

                         order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found

                         that petitioner has antecedent of three cases only, in that event,

                         the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed

                         forthwith.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-

U          T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.