Patna High Court
Vikash OraonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, holding that the allegations do not justify denial of bail.
Summary
Vikash Oraon applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 alleging that six litres of liquor were recovered from the courtyard of his joint‑family house. The petitioner argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, that the property is jointly owned, and that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and the concept of a presumed offender. He also contended that the complaint was filed by a hostile watchman who had no prior knowledge of his involvement. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the order to be confirmed if he is found to have a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case alleging possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender applies post‑2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
- Whether the joint‑family nature of the property negates the inference of the petitioner’s possession.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 438
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7397 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-364 Year-2025 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria
======================================================
Vikash Oraon Son of Laxmi Uraon @ Laxmi Uravn Resident of Village-
Sirasiya Hanumanganj Mahthawa Ward No. 02, P.S.- Bhargama, District-
Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 6 litres of liquor from the courtyard of the house of
the petitioner.
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.7397 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
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 with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also
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.
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 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 Bhargama P.S. Case No. 364 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7397 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
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.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…