Patna High Court
Rambabu ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of antecedents and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Petitioners Rambabu Chaudhary and Dhiraj Chaudhary applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Sections 30(a) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for the alleged recovery of 295.200 litres of liquor from their jointly owned house. They argued that they were not arrested at the spot, no liquor was found in their conscious possession, and the 2018 amendment had abolished the doctrine of deemed possession, making the charge untenable. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., directing verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if the antecedent verification revealed more cases than disclosed, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act where the alleged possession is not in conscious possession of the accused.
- Whether the removal of the concept of deemed possession by the 2018 amendment precludes the prosecution from proceeding.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- liquor seizure
- excise law
- possession
- criminal antecedent
- section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85230 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2025 Thana- Pachpakdi District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Rambabu Chaudhary S/O Ranjibh Chaudhary @ Bhikhar Chaudhary R/O
Village- Pachpakri, P.S.- Pachapakri Dist.- East Champaran.
2. Dhiraj Chaudhary S/O Sarju Chaudhary R/O Village- Pachpakri, P.S.-
Pachapakri Dist.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhannjay Kumar II, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
41(i) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent and
allegation is of recovery of 295.200 litres of liquor from house
of the petitioners. It is next submitted that petitioners were not
arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from
their conscious possession and the house in question is a joint
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85230 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that
it were petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the
liquor kept in the house was within their 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 petitioners came to be implicated based on secret
information, which is the easiest way to implicate without
holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Special Judge Excise Court No.-1, East Champaran at Motihari
in connection with Pachpakri P.S. Case No.122 of 2025, subject
to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85230 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioners shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner no.1 has antecedents of more than one case
and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioners for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed their 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 no.1 has antecedent of only one case and
petitioner no.2 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…