Patna High Court
Sachin sahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of his antecedent, as the allegations lack sufficient evidentiary basis and the amended law no longer supports a presumption of possession.
Summary
The petitioner, Sachin Sahani, applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case under Sections 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged possession of 50 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not in actual possession at the time of seizure, and that the case is based solely on a confessional statement of another individual, which lacks evidentiary value, especially after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act that abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warrant custody. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bail bond and two sureties, directing verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. The order further stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in light of the allegations under the B.N.S. and Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of another person can form the basis for denying anticipatory bail.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act on the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 274, 275
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12657 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-297 Year-2025 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Sachin sahani Son of Mahendra sahani Resident of village- Lahladpur, Ps-
Gadhahiya Bajar Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Akbar Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-03-2026 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 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and 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 50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 is not the owner of
the seized motorcycle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Ravindra Sahni in police custody,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12657 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
which does not have any evidentiary value and after
Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed
possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It
is reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent.
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
Rajepur P. S. Case No.297 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12657 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
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…