Patna High Court
Uma Shankar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedents, because there is no evidence of his direct possession and he has a clean record.
Summary
The petitioner, Uma Shankar Kumar, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for allegedly possessing 12.75 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not found in his immediate possession, and the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean antecedent and the lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and sureties, directing the trial court to verify his antecedents. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case of alleged possession of liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether the amendment removing the concept of deemed possession affects the applicability of the charge against the petitioner
- Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents before confirming the anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84940 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2025 Thana- SINDHUGAR District- Gaya
======================================================
Uma Shankar Kumar Son of Late Raghuni Manjhi Resident of village -
Matagadha, Ps- Sindhugadha, Dist- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bishweshwar Ram
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 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, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 12.75 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 knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84940 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
the year 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, without holding a proper investigation.
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.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
Sindhugadha P.S. Case No.125/2025, 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
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84940 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.