Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Binod Kumar @ Vinod KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to specified conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Binod Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 575.28 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, surrender within six weeks, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents before confirming the bail. The order also required the petitioner to deposit Rs.2,500 with the Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where possession of liquor is not conclusively established.
  • Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act removing deemed possession on the grant of bail.
  • What conditions may be imposed while granting anticipatory bail in such offences.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Excise Act
  • Section 30(a)
  • deemed possession
  • joint family property
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Section 438

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4515 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-446 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                                   District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Binod Kumar @ Vinod Kumar S/o Nathuni Singh R/o Village- Subedar
                 Bigha, PS- Obra, Distt- Aurangabad

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Ms.Mukul Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   31-01-2026                  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 one case under the Excise Act

                   and allegation is of recovery of 575.28 litres of liquor from the

                   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.4515 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                            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 then, it is 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Excise P. S. Case No.446 of 2020, subject to the conditions

          laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4515 of 2026(2) dt.31-01-2026
                                                           3/3




                                      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 one case, 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 one case only, in that event, the

                         provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

                                      9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on

                         behalf of the petitioner based on instruction submits that

                         petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.2500/- with

                         Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court, Patna within a

                         period of two weeks from today.



                                                   (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…

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