Patna High Court
Mithlesh ChaudhariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Mithlesh Chaudhari applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 alleging that 67 litres of liquor were recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that the amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations were sufficient to justify arrest. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a condition that the trial court verify the petitioner’s antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail would be revoked. The petitioner was also directed to deposit Rs.1,500 with the Patna High Court Advocate Association.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the present case?
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018, is applicable to the petitioner?
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession justify the grant of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6284 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2025 Thana- JAMHOR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Mithlesh Chaudhari S/o Late Faguni Chaudhary R/o Village- Kuramha Tola,
P.S.- Jamhore, Distt.- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
30(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act,
2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 67 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner
and Durga Chaudhary.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6284 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
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. It is next
submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of
the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence
then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of
the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean
antecedent.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Jamhore
P.S. Case No. 291 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6284 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
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 even 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 is a
person with clean antecedent 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.1,500/- with the Advocate Association
of the Patna High Court within a period of two weeks from
today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…