Patna High Court
Ramkewal SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate and granted provisional bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
Ramkewal Sahani applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 14.5 litres of liquor from shops he owned. He argued that no liquor was seized from his possession, that he was implicated by a watchman with whom he had a personal dispute, and that he had only two prior cases under the Excise Act. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent by the trial court. The court stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would be revoked, otherwise the provisional order would be confirmed. The application was allowed, granting anticipatory bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC for offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of two Excise Act cases precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the absence of seizure from the petitioner’s possession justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- provisional bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2079 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2025 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ramkewal Sahani Son of Sukdev Sahani @ Sukdev Sahni @ Sukhdev Sahani
@ Sukdev Sahni Resident of village - Jhakhiya, P.S.- Banjariya, District -
East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 14.500 litres of liquor from three
different shops and from two co-accused persons.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
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 one of the shop
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2079 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
from which 09 litres of liquor is alleged to have been recovered.
It is further submitted that no prudent person would use his own
premises for committing a crime and thus, would create
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated and at
the same time, would bring disrepute to his business. It is
further submitted that that it appears that some customer came
and without the knowledge of the petitioner kept liquor for
consumption and the petitioner came to be implicated at the
instance of chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is
further submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence, then why he
did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R.,
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2079 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection
with Banjariya P. S. Case No.467 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner based on instruction submits that
petitioner undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- with
Lawyers’ Association, Patna High Court, Patna.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…