Patna High Court
Uday Kumar Sah @ Uday KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Uday Kumar Sah, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 1.440 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, that the concept of deemed possession was abolished after the 2018 amendment, and that the accusation stemmed from a hostile chowkidar. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent within six weeks. If any antecedent is found, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, the provisional bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Excise Act provisions.
- Whether the removal of the deemed possession concept post-2018 amendment affects the petitioner’s liability.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45951 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2026 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Uday Kumar Sah @ Uday Kumar S/o Raj Kumar Sah R/o Village- Harsidhi
Ward No. 01, P.S- Harsidhi, Dist- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Ranjana Srivastava
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-07-2026 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 1.440 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.45951 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
2/3
knowledge andt 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 also submitted that it does not appear probable that
Chowkidar would have known who had concealed the liquor in
the house.
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 Harsidhi
P.S. Case No. 207 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45951 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
3/3
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 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.