Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that, given the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession, provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to verification of antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of eight litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and the amendment to the Excise Act had removed the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering these submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC. The court clarified that if any criminal antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act when the alleged liquor is not in the accused's conscious possession.
- Whether the amendment removing the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender under the Excise Act affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30 Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- joint family property
- deemed possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9193 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1258 Year-2025 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Chaudhary S/O Bhagan Chaudhary @ Bhagwanlal
Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Minapur,P.S- Hajipur Town,Dist.- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kahkashan Alam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 08 litres of liquor from the house of the
petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the house in
question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9193 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his
knowledge and he came to be implicated based on secret
information, which is the easiest way to implicate someone
without holding a proper investigation, when admittedly
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is also submitted
that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of
deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away
with.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum 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
Hajipur Town P. S. Case No.1258 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9193 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner 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 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)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…