Patna High Court
Rameshwar Prasad Yadav @ Gullay Prasad Yadav @ Rameshwar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Rameshwar Prasad Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 1.125 litres of liquor recovered from the house of Bablu Prasad, a joint family property. The petitioner argued he had a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the alleged possession could not be proved, especially after the 2018 amendment that abolished the concept of deemed possession. The State opposed the bail, relying on the recovery and a confessional statement made by Bablu Prasad while in police custody. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, the provisional order will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged offences under IPC Sections 406, 420, 34 and Bihar Excise Act Section 30(a).
- Whether the recovery of liquor from a joint family house and a confessional statement made in police custody constitute sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the post‑2018 amendment abolishing deemed possession affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Bihar Excise Act
- deemed possession
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90924 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2022 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
Rameshwar Prasad Yadav @ Gullay Prasad Yadav @ Rameshwar Yadav S/o-
Late Tola Prasad Yadav R/v- Saidpur, Lala Toli Po- Bankipore Ps-
KadamKuan Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Syed Mohammad Ibrahim Quli, Advocate
Mr. Adil Abbas, Advocate
Mr. Vishal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 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 406, 420
and 34 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 1.125 liters of liquor from house of Bablu Prasad.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90924 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
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 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 confessional statement of Bablu
in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
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 Kadam
Kuan P.S. Case No. 342 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90924 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
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…