Patna High Court
Vipin KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court provisionally granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Vipin Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged possession of 8.625 litres of liquor. He argued that the liquor was found in a joint family house, he had no conscious possession, and the amended excise law no longer recognizes deemed possession or presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending the allegations warranted prosecution. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his antecedent within six weeks. If any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under IPC Sections 272, 273 and Bihar Excise Act Section 30(a).
- Whether the concept of deemed possession applies post the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act.
- Whether the joint family nature of the property negates the presumption of possession by the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- IPC 272
- IPC 273
- Bihar Excise Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90234 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2022 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Vipin Kumar S/o Ram Pravesh Rai R/o village- Jagdishpur, PS- Raghopur,
District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Bela Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 272 and
273 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 8.625 liters of liquor from house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended 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.90234 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
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. It is next submitted that petitioner
came to be implicated based on secret information which is the
easiest way to implicate someone
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 Raghopur
P.S. Case No. 351 of 2022 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90234 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be 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)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…