Patna High Court
Pappu Kumar Gupta @ Pappu Kumar Shah @ Pappu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted, subject to verification of antecedents and conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Kumar Gupta, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 9.6 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the house being joint property, and that the 2018 amendment had abolished the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender. He also contended that the complaint was filed by a hostile chowkidar who had not reported the matter earlier. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and conditionally confirm the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 eliminates the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender applicable to the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67775 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-312 Year-2021 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Pappu Kumar Gupta @ Pappu Kumar Shah @ Pappu Kumar S/o Late Raj
Kishore Shah Resident of Village- Mahual Bazar, P.S.- Hussainganj, Distt.-
Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Khurshid Anwar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 07-01-2026 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 Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 9.6 litres of liquor from 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.67775 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
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 at the
instance of chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It
is also submitted that if chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR,
which further casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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.5000/- (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
Hussainganj P.S. Case No.312/2021, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67775 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…