Patna High Court

Ramesh SahniversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Ramesh Sahni, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly possessing 45 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure, and was unaware that another person, Sanjay, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the allegations warranted arrest. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs. 500 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in view of the alleged offences under Sections 274, 275 of the BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275
BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail bond
surety
criminal antecedent
vehicle ownership
liquor seizure
Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18740 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-967 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Ramesh Sahni S/o Ram Sharan Sahni R/o Givindpur, P.O- Singhara, P.S-
                 Mahua, District- Vaishali

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Subhash Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Md. Iftekhar Mahmood
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-03-2026               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 Sections 274, 275

                   of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 45 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

                   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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18740 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                            2/3




          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,

          it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware

          that Sanjay would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,

          who was also apprehended 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 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 Mahua

          P.S. Case No. 967 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
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18740 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…