Patna High Court
Sanjay Rai @ Sanjay PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the petitioner having no more than three prior cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Rai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 37(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 7 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the house being a joint family property, and that the concept of deemed possession was abolished after the 2018 amendment. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement made by Chote Yadav while in police custody, which the petitioner contended lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail application. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and the condition that bail would not be confirmed if more than three prior cases are found, but would be confirmed if exactly three are found.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the alleged offence is based on alleged possession in a joint family house and a confessional statement made in police custody.
- Whether the amendment removing the concept of deemed possession affects the bail consideration.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents influence the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62324 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-250 Year-2022 Thana- FATUA District- Patna
======================================================
Sanjay Rai @ Sanjay Prasad S/o Late Devnandan Rai @ Devnandan Ray R/o
Village - Maksudpur, P.S - Fatuha, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-01-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
37(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases, out of which, two cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 7 litres
of liquor from the house of the petitioner. It is next submitted
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
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.62324 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
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 Chote Yadav in police custody which
does not have any evidentiary value.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. 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 from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.15000/- (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
Fatuha P.S. Case No.250/2022, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. 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
three cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62324 of 2025(3) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…