Sudhir Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar Gupta Manikchand v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3364 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-398 Year-2015 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Jamui ====================================================== Sudhir Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar Gupta @ Sudhir Kumar Gupta Manikchand S/o Late Vishwanath Sah R/o Vill- Telwa Bazar, P.S.- Simultala, Distt- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prakash Mahto, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026

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 47(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3364 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 2/3 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 the secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone without holding a proper investigation of the case.

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, let 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 Case No. 398 C-2 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./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 if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3364 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 3/3 before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.1,500/- with the Advocate Association of the Patna High Court.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T