Patna High Court
Ramesh Kumar SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Kumar Sahani, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 100 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He claimed a clean criminal record, but the impugned order recorded an antecedent case, which he contested, arguing he was unaware of his friend's misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed verification of the petitioner’s antecedent. The court stipulated that if an antecedent is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act?
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent, if any, should affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2)
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15445 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2024 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ramesh Kumar Sahani Son of Amar Sahani @ Amar Sahni Resident of
Village- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Raghunathpur, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhurendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Renuka Ratnakar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-03-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, but then
inadvertently in the order impugned, it has been recorded that
petitioner has antecedent of one case. It is next submitted that
allegation is of recovery of 100 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15445 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner as
alleged, who fled from the spot.
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 within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds 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 Town P.S. Case No. 89 of 2024, 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
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 would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15445 of 2026(2) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
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 is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…