Patna High Court
Salman GaddiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bonds, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Salman Gaddi, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for allegedly possessing 30.6 litres of liquor recovered from an e‑rickshaw he owned. He argued that he had no conscious possession of the liquor, had a clean antecedent, and was unaware that another person, Shahabuddin Gaddi, misused his vehicle. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court considered the submissions and, applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic and Substance (B.N.S.S.) Act, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond and sureties, with a condition that the trial court verify his 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 438 CrPC in a case of alleged liquor possession under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession and clean antecedent justify granting anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- vehicle ownership
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20438 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2025 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Salman Gaddi S/O Shabir Gaddi R/O Village- Gambhiriya Buzurg, Police
Station- Padrauna, District- Kushi Nagar (Uttar Pradesh).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kr Singh No. 1, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 30.6 litres of liquor from an E-rickshaw.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20438 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
would get implicated. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that Shahabuddin Gaddi 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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Dhanaha P.S. Case
No. 27 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20438 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…