Upendra DasversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46437 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2026 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Upendra Das Son of Late Prabhu Das Resident of Village- Dhanhar Dihuli
                 Tola Laxmipur, P.S.- Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Abhishek Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Ms.Asha Devi
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   14-07-2026                  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

                   Sections 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the

                   Excise Act.

                                3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   the petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act

                   and allegation is of recovery of 95 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46437 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
                                            2/3




          question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged

          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

          Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also

          submitted that it does not appear probable that Chaukidar would

          have known who had concealed the liquor in the house.

                       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

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

          Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection

          with Ramgarhwa P. S. Case No.227 of 2026, subject to the

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

                       7. The application stands allowed.
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46437 of 2026(2) dt.14-07-2026
                                                           3/3




                                      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