Patna High Court
Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Kumar RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged possession of 33.57 litres of liquor recovered from his joint family house. He argued that he had no conscious possession, the liquor could belong to other family members, and that the amendment of 2018 had abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending the petitioner was implicated by the chowkidar’s information. The High Court, considering the clean antecedent claim and the factual uncertainties, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal record. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 where the alleged liquor was recovered from a joint family house and the petitioner claims no conscious possession.
- Whether the 2018 amendment removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender affects the petitioner’s liability.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, if any, warrants denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- joint family property
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91871 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2025 Thana- SIKARHATTA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Rai R/o Jitendra Rai Resident of Village -
Ratni, P.S. - Sikarhatta, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 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 33.57 litres of liquor from 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. It is also submitted that after amendment
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91871 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with and
the petitioner 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. 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 Exclusive Special
Excise Judge-II, Bhojpur, Ara in connection with Sikarhatta P.S.
Case No.144 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91871 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
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 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…