Patna High Court
Santosh ChaudhariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail‑bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Santosh Chaudhari applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 alleging that 4 litres of liquor were recovered from his joint‑family house. The petitioner argued that he had no conscious possession, the house is a joint family property and he has a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offence is non‑bailable. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.500 bail‑bond with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent. The order stipulated that if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 where the alleged liquor is recovered from a joint‑family house and no conscious possession is established.
- Whether the removal of the concept of deemed possession after the 2018 amendment affects the bail decision.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. can be invoked to conditionally grant provisional anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor offence
- excise law
- joint family property
- deemed possession
- Section 30
- Section 482
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89792 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-196 Year-2025 Thana- Mehendiya District- Arwal
======================================================
Santosh Chaudhari Son of Ramdas Chaudhari Residence of village - Mahabir
Ganj, P.S.- Mahendiya, Dist.- Arwal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Neeraj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. 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 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of co-accused
persons out of which 4 litres of liquor is alleged to have been
recovered from the 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89792 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
the house or the 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 petitioners came to be implicated
based on secret information, which is the easiest way to
implicate someone.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge
Excise-II, Jehanabad in connection with Mahendiya P.S. Case
No.196 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
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89792 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
anticipatory bail had concealed his 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 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…