Patna High Court
Dhiraj Das @ Dhiraj Kurail @ Dhiraj Kumar DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted, subject to verification of antecedents and the conditions stipulated under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhiraj Das, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018, alleging recovery of 38 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he was not arrested at the scene, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the concept of deemed possession had been removed by the 2018 amendment, making the prosecution's case weak. The State opposed the bail, contending the offence was established. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bond with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one antecedent exists, the bail will be confirmed immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Whether the removal of the concept of deemed possession under the 2018 amendment affects the prosecution's case.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedents warrant confirmation or cancellation of the provisional bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- excise law
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90600 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-318 Year-2025 Thana- BARARI District- Katihar
======================================================
Dhiraj Das @ Dhiraj Kurail @ Dhiraj Kumar Das S/o Tarun Kurail Resident
of Village- Santhal Tola Barari, PS- Barari, District- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh
======================================================
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 38 litres of liquor 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 the house or the liquor kept in the house was
within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90600 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed
offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated
at the instance of chowkidar but then it is submitted that if
chowkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the
occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to
institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) 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 Barari
P.S. Case No.318/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90600 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…