Patna High Court
Vishal Kumar Chaudhary @ Chintu @ Kumar SharveshresthversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that, due to the lack of concrete evidence of possession and the inadmissibility of the custodial confessional statement, provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of antecedents.
Summary
Vishal Kumar Chaudhary sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 alleging recovery of 327.75 litres of liquor from his joint family house. The petitioner argued that no liquor was found in his conscious possession, the house is a joint family property, and the concept of deemed possession was removed by the 2018 amendment, making the charge untenable. He further contended that the only basis for his implication was a confessional statement made by another person, Uttam, while in police custody, which lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents before confirming the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
- Whether the alleged possession of liquor can be established in the absence of conscious possession and joint family ownership.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act eliminated the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46366 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2026 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Vishal Kumar Chaudhary @ Chintu @ Kumar Sharveshresth S/O Upendra
Kumar @ Upendra Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Narhan, P.s.- Bibhutipur, Dist.-
Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-07-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 327.75 litres of liquor from house of
the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46366 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
2/3
with certainty that it was 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 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
confessional statement of Uttam in police custody, which does
not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information 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 within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5000/- (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 Bibhutipur P.S. Case No.213 of 2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46366 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
3/3
B.N.S.S.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.