Patna High Court
Sitaram BindversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Sitaram Bind, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly possessing 21.5 litres of liquor recovered from his house, which is a joint family property. He argued that he had no conscious possession, has a clean antecedent, and that the amendment to the Excise Act in 2018 abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The Court considered these submissions and, under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a six‑week window for surrender. The order also directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the bail to be confirmed if he is found clean, or revoked if any antecedent is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case of alleged possession under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether the absence of conscious possession and the joint family nature of the property affect the grant of anticipatory bail
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender impacts the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 438
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89643 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-487 Year-2025 Thana- CHAINPUR District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Sitaram Bind Son of Rajindra Bind R/o Village - Jairampur, P.S. - Chainpur,
Dist. - Kaimur at Bhabhua.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 21.5 litres of liquor from 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
had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house
was within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89643 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
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 based on the
secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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 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 Chainpur
P.S. Case No. 487 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89643 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
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…