Patna High Court
Munna ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent, to be confirmed if no prior case is found.
Summary
Munna Chaudhary sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged possession of 10 litres of liquor recovered from his house. He argued he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was in a joint family property, and no conscious possession was established, especially after the 2018 amendment that abolished the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, and directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if none is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where alleged possession is not proven.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession affects the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent must be verified before confirming anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84997 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- EKMA District- Saran
======================================================
Munna Chaudhary S/o Late Bhagwan Chaudhary Resident of - Parsagarh, P.S
- Ekma, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mirtunjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmanand Prasad, APP
======================================================
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, Sri Parmanand Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and after 2018
amendment in the Excise Act, the concept of deemed possession
and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next
submitted that the house in question is a joint family property as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84997 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
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 knowledge of the petitioner and he came to be
implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom his family
is on an inimical term.
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, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
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 Ekma
P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
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 would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84997 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
confirmed, but after verification if 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)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…