Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Arvind Sahni @ ArvindversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied.

Summary

Arvind Sahni sought anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 30(a), 32(1) and 32(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, where the prosecution alleged recovery of 60 litres of illicit liquor. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating that no liquor was seized from him and that he was not apprehended at the spot, but the State highlighted his pending criminal case of a similar nature. The court examined whether the facts and the petitioner’s criminal antecedent warranted the grant of anticipatory bail. Considering the seriousness of the offence and the existing pending case, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail. The petitioner was directed to surrender within six weeks, after which the trial court would consider his bail application on merits.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 given the alleged recovery of illicit liquor and his prior criminal antecedent.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • illicit liquor
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • criminal antecedent
  • bail procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22623 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2026 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Arvind Sahni @ Arvind S/o Ram Ishwar Sahni @ Ramiswer Sahni R/o
                 Village- Rasulpur Fatah, P.S.- Goraul, Dist- Vaishali
                                                                              ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                       ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Aniket Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Nityanand, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Goraul (Katahara) P.S. Case No. 84 of 2026, dated

                   14.02.2026, lodged under Sections 30(a), 32(1) & 32(2) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, pending

                   before the Court of Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1-cum-

                   Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur.

                                3. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 60 litres of

                   illicit liquor has been made, which is the subject matter of the

                   present case.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

                   further submits that the petitioner was neither apprehended from

                   the spot nor was anything illicit recovered from his possession.
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22623 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
                                                      2/2




                    Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedent of the

                    petitioner is not clean, as there is one criminal case pending

                    against him.

                                 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                    bail of the petitioner and submits that the criminal antecedent of

                    the petitioner is not clean, as there is one criminal case of the

                    same nature pending against him.

                                 6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is

                    not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                    Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

                    hereby rejected.

                                 7. It is directed to the petitioner to surrender before

                    the Trial Court within a period of 6 weeks from today. In case,

                    the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, then the Trial Court

                    is directed to pass order on his surrender-cum-bail application

                    on the same day without being prejudice that the anticipatory

                    bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court and the

                    Trial Court shall pass order on the merit of this case.



                                                                         (Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.