Patna High Court
Avinash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court ordered provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents, without confirming it pending trial court’s findings.
Summary
Avinash Kumar sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, where liquor and two motorcycles were allegedly recovered from a joint family house. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, had no conscious possession of the liquor, and that the house being a joint family property precludes certainty of his knowledge or control. He further contended that the 2018 amendment abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and that the prosecution’s case relied solely on a confessional statement made by his father, who was allegedly pressured. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.15,000 and two sureties, with the trial court to verify his criminal antecedents; if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case 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.
- Whether a father's confessional statement can alone justify the petitioner’s arrest.
- Effect of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents on the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- excise law
- criminal antecedents
- confessional statement
- joint family property
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7741 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2025 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Avinash Kumar son of Ram Swarth Mahto Resident Of Village- Thumma,
Ward No 4, PS -Runnisaidpur, Distt- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ritesh Kumar Narain Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State Mr. Rabindra Kumar.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases
are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of
160.125 litres of liquor from house of Ram Swarath Mahto and
two motorcycles were seized. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7741 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
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 based on confessional
statement of his father Ram Swarath Mahto. It is also submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of any of the seized vehicle. It is
further submitted that his father was pressurized to disclose the
name of the petitioner since he was having criminal antecedents.
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 within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen 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 Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No.321/2025, 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.7741 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
three cases, 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 three
cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall
be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…