Patna High Court
Vijay SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of his antecedent, holding that mere ownership of the vehicle does not automatically render him culpable.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Sahani, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving the alleged recovery of 1,746 litres of liquor from a truck he owned, under Sections 30(a), 32(ii), 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and that the vehicle was misused by his driver Amit Kumar in collusion with the consignee and Rahul Sahani. The State opposed the bail, contending that ownership of the vehicle could establish culpability. The Court, considering the petitioner's lack of direct involvement and clean record, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of his antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case of alleged liquor smuggling.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle used for the alleged offence suffices to establish participation in the offence.
- Whether the petitioner's clean antecedent influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22110 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2025 Thana- Manuapul District- West Champaran
======================================================
Vijay Sahani S/o Shobhit Sahani R/o Vill- Bhatauna, P.S.- Karja, Distt-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a),
32(ii), 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act,
2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 1746 litres of liquor from a truck.
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22110 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
and, thus, would create evidence against himself and, hence,
would get implicated and at the same time shall bring disrepute
to his business. It is also submitted that petitioner was
completely unaware that his driver, namely, Amit Kumar in
connivance with the consignee and Rahul Sahani would misuse
the vehicle in the manner as alleged as Amit Kumar along with
Rahul Sahani was also arrested.
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 Manuapul P.S.
Case No. 155 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22110 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
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 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…