Patna High Court
Sanjay SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Sah, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for alleged recovery of 6.44 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his kiosk. He contended that the liquor was not in his possession, the place did not belong to him, and the FIR lacked the informant’s name, indicating a weak investigation. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than one antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one, it will be confirmed forthwith. Thus, the petitioner was released on provisional anticipatory bail pending verification.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the alleged facts and lack of possession justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20516 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2026 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran
======================================================
Sanjay Sah son of Baijnath Sah Resident of village- Fardahiya PS -
Mashrakh, Dist- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 31-03-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 6.440 litres of liquor from a place
behind the kiosk situated behind the litti-meet-cart shop of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
but then is near to his cart shop and he came to be implicated at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20516 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
the instance of the local person but then the name of the person
who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the
FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution,
when petitioner has not been implicated based on the secret
information. It is further submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise the police start
implicating mechanically without holding a proper investigation
of the case.
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, 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.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
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 Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 76 of 2026,
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20516 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than 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
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…