Patna High Court
Vakil SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent and compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Vakil Sahani, a petitioner with a clean antecedent, feared arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 15 litres of liquor from Vasudeo Ram. He argued that he had no direct possession and was implicated solely on a confessional statement made by Vasudeo Ram while in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and that the trial court verify his antecedent within six weeks. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; if his antecedent remains clean, the provisional order will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of Vasudeo Ram, made in police custody, can be the basis for implicating the petitioner.
- Whether the amendment to the Bihar Excise Act in 2018, which removed the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender, affects the petitioner's liability.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- confessional statement
- deemed possession
- presumed offender
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17895 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-428 Year-2025 Thana- PATEPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Vakil Sahani S/O Late Sonelal Sahani R/O Vill.- Bahuaara/Bhuaara Kothi,
P.S.- Patepur, Dist.- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nidhi Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pronoti Singh, APP
======================================================
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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 15 liters of liquor from possession of Vasudeo Ram.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and came to be
implicated based on confessional statement of Vasudeo Ram in
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value and
he has no concern or relation with Vasudeo. It is next submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17895 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
that after amendment in the excise act in the year 2018, the
concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been
done away with.
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 before the learned Trial Court
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 Patepur
P.S. Case No. 428 of 2025 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17895 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.