Patna High Court
Balindra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of their criminal antecedents.
Summary
Balindra Yadav and Sunil Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, where 396 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from four motorcycles. They argued that they were not arrested on the spot, no liquor was found in their possession, and the only basis for their implication was a confessional statement made by a third person, Nitesh, while in police custody, which they claimed lacks evidentiary value. The petitioners further contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, and that the police were mechanically implicating individuals without proper investigation. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.40,000 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents, after which the bail could be confirmed or revoked.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances described.
- Whether a confessional statement of a third person in police custody can form a basis for implicating the petitioners.
- Whether the 2018 amendment to the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act has eliminated the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57803 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARIYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Balindra Yadav S/O Misri Yadav R/O Madwani, P.S- Phulwaria, Distt.-
Gopalganj.
2. Sunil Yadav S/O Suresh Yadav R/O Mardwani, P.S- Phulwariya, Distt.-
Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepankar Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 15-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of 8 cases, out of which, six cases
are under the Excise Act and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of
six cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
396 litres of liquor from four motorcycles. It is next submitted
that petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession and are not the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57803 of 2025(4) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
owner of any of the seized vehicle and they came to be
implicated based on confessional statement of Nitesh in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also
submitted that 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 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. It is also submitted that
petitioners earlier in similar manner came to be implicated in
cases relating to excise.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand)
each 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 Phulwariya P.S. Case No.103/2025,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57803 of 2025(4) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent
of more than eight cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of
more than six cases, in that event, it would be presumed that
petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as
such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed with respect to those petitioners whose criminal
antecedent does not tally but if after verification the criminal
antecedent as recorded hereinabove tallies with the petitioners in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…