Patna High Court
CR. MISC./52756/2026 of Girja Shankar Dhangad Vs The State of Bihar on 29 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52756 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2026 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Girja Shankar Dhangad S/o Late Daroga Dhagad R/o Village - Laghunaha, Dhangad Tola, Ward
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52756 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2026 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ======================================================
Girja Shankar Dhangad S/o Late Daroga Dhagad R/o Village - Laghunaha, Dhangad Tola, Ward No. 10, PS - Chanpatiya, District - West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Gyan Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
29-07-2026
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 19 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 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 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52756 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
the house or the liquor kept in the house was within knowledge of the petitioner. 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 he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term but then it is submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
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, 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. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) 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 Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 236 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52756 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than three cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three cases in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Sumit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T