Patna High Court
Ranjit SahaniversusThe state of bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties and verification of antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjit Sahani, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for alleged recovery of 24 litres of liquor from a cattle shed owned by a third party. He argued he had no possession of the liquor, no antecedent record, and the allegation was based solely on a confessional statement of another accused, which lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The court noted the amendment to the Excise Act had removed the doctrine of deemed possession and, given the petitioner’s clean record and lack of direct involvement, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond, sureties and verification of his antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
- Whether the absence of possession and clean antecedent justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- clean antecedent
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17739 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2022 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Ranjit Sahani S/O Late Indrasan Sahani R/O Vill.- Chakki Sohagpur, P.S-
Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The state of bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 24 litres of liquor from cattle shed of Vijay. 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 public at large and he has not
concern or relation with Vijay and he came to be implicated
based on confessional statement of apprehended accused in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17739 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. 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.
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.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 Paroo P.S. Case No.2/2022, 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 even 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 is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17739 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
antecedent, 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.