Gopi Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31558 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2026 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Gopi Sah S/o Kailash Sah Resident of Village- Govindpur Singhara, PSMahua, Distt.- Vaishali 2.
Garib Sah @ Garibnath Kumar S/o Kailash Sah Resident of VillageGovindpur Singhara, PS- Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali 3.
Pushun Sah @ Pushan Kumar S/o Tuntun Sah Resident of VillageGovindpur Singhara, PS- Mahua, Distt.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Santosh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Khurshid Anwar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 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 Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 73.515 litres of liquor from the house of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and 7.5 litres of liquor from the house of petitioner no. 3.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31558 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 2/3 petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it were petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioners. 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 and they came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioners 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.
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. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31558 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 3/3 the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 129 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 event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case 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 are person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T