Patna High Court
Anil Sahani @ Anil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with bail conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Sahani, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Sections 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that 50 litres of liquor were recovered from a bamboo orchard not belonging to him and that no liquor was found in his possession. He argued that the FIR did not name him and that the allegation was based on a disclosure by a local person, rendering the prosecution’s case weak. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. If more than one antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one antecedent is found, the bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
- Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and lack of seizure from his possession justify anticipatory bail
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedents affect the confirmation of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13596 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-641 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Anil Sahani @ Anil Kumar son of Ramnath Sahani Resident of Village-
Bishunpur Kalayan, Tole Nawalpur, PS -Sahebganj, District -Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
30(d) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a bamboo orchard. It is next
submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such
nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even
alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioner and is accessible to villagers at large and he came to
be implicated based on disclosure made by the local person but
then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13596 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion
on the case of the prosecution, more so, when petitioner has not
been implicated based on secret information.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five 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 Sahebganj P.S. Case No.641/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13596 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.