Patna High Court
Dipak PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Dipak Paswan, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 15 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 FIR omitted the informant’s name, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bail bond with two sureties, a deposit of Rs.2,500 with the High Court Legal Services Committee, and a condition that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents before confirming the bail. If more than one antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one, it will be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act where alleged possession is disputed.
- Whether the amendment removing the concept of deemed possession affects the bail application.
- Whether the lack of an informant’s name in the FIR undermines the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Substance (BNSS) Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4914 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2025 Thana- BALIGAON District- Vaishali
======================================================
Dipak Paswan S/o- Rama Paswan Resident of Village- Bela Sanghan P.S.-
Baligaon, District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-02-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 15 litres of liquor from the 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. It is further submitted
that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4914 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
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. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of
the local person but then the name of the person who disclosed
the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted
that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the
police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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, let 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.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 Baligaon
P.S. Case No. 162 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4914 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to
deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the High Court Legal
Services Committee, Patna within a period of two weeks from
today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…