Ram Awatar Sao v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21183 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2026 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Ram Awatar Sao Resident of Village - Bakarganj Near Rupak Cinema, P.S. - Bakarganj, District - Patna.

2.

Rahul Kumar Son of Ram Awatar Sao Resident of Village - Bakarganj Near Rupak Cinema, P.S. - Bakarganj, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have antecedent of two cases and allegation is of recovery of 1.08 litres of liquor from possession of Kallu. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged recover is from Kallu with whom petitioners have no concern or

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21183 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 relation and they came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Kallu in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that 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 further submitted that of late police has started implicating accused person who has antecedent other than Excise in cases relating to Excise for obvious reason without holding a proper investigation.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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 Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 89 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21183 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026 3/3 event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than two cases then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T