Patna High Court
Tunnu Sahni @ Tunni Sahni @ Tunnu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions and verification of criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioners, Tunnu Sahni and Golu Sahni, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 560 litres of liquor from two boats. They argued they were not caught in possession, the FIR did not name the informant, and they had no or minimal criminal antecedent. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, requiring each petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal records by the trial court under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. If any petitioner is found to have concealed antecedents, the bail will not be confirmed for that individual. Upon verification showing clean records, the provisional bail will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents warrant denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17197 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2025 Thana- MAKER District- Saran
======================================================
1. Tunnu Sahni @ Tunni Sahni @ Tunnu Kumar Son of Mohan Sahni @ Sri
Mohan Sahni Resident of village- Murahi Ps- Maker, Dist- Saran
2. Golu Sahni @ Golu Kumar son of Ram Janam Sahani Resident of village-
Baligaon, Ps- Parsa, Dist- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner
no. 2 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of recovery of
560 litres of liquor from two boats.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and is not the owner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17197 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
of any of the seized boats and they came to be implicated at the
instance of local people, but then the name of the person, who
disclosed the name of the petitioners is not disclosed in the FIR,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when
petitioners have not been implicated based on secret
information.
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. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each 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 Maker P.S. Case No. 290 of 2025,
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 petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of even
one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than one
case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17197 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
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 petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and
petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…