Patna High Court
Birju YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the stipulated bail bond and deposit conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Birju Yadav sought anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 14.625 litres of liquor recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted arrest. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and a condition that the petitioner deposit Rs.2,500 with the Advocates’ Association. The order also stipulated that the trial court verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, and the bail would be confirmed only if he has no more than one prior case; otherwise, the provisional bail would not be confirmed. The petitioner’s counsel agreed to comply with the deposit condition.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where alleged possession is disputed.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender affects the bail application.
- Whether the High Court can impose conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS while granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- joint family property
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6426 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2025 Thana- BENIPATTI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Birju Yadav S/O Saukhilal Yadav R/O Vill-Saulighat,Basaith Chandpura,P.S-
Benipatti,Distt-Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Pallavi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Devi, APP
======================================================
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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar 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 14.625 liters of liquor from house of
the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6426 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
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 and he came to be implicated at the
instance of local person, but then it is submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of
Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation.
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, 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 Benipatti
P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6426 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
based on instruction, undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.
2500/- with Advocates’ Association, Patna High Court within a
period of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…