Patna High Court
Pawan Sah @ Pawan Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent and compliance with the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
Petitioner Pawan Sah applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the recovery of 9.75 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and the recent amendment to the Excise Act has done away with the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, it will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act where the alleged liquor was recovered from a joint family house and no conscious possession is established.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6983 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-454 Year-2025 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria
======================================================
Pawan Sah @ Pawan Kumar Sah S/O Giranand Sah R/O Village- Swaldah
Majhua, Ward No.-11, P.S- Narpatganj, Distt.- Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 9.750 litres of liquor from the house of the
petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6983 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with and he came to be implicated based on secret
information, which is the easiest way to implicate someone.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Narpatganj P. S. Case No.454 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6983 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court,
in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail order shall
not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…