Patna High Court
Ajay SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail, granting provisional bail subject to conditions and verification of antecedents.
Summary
Ajay Sahni applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. after being implicated in an offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 542.4 litres of liquor from a motorcycle he owned. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor, was unaware of his friend's misuse of the vehicle, and that ownership alone should not create evidence against him. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail would be confirmed. The application for anticipatory bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is merely the owner of the vehicle from which liquor was recovered and not in actual possession.
- Whether the presence of prior criminal antecedents affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act is amenable to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- possession
- vehicle ownership
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22760 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2026 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ajay Sahni S/O Mintu Sahni R/O Village - Bakhri, Bhataulia, Ward No.- 1,
P.S- Bairgania and Distt.- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Deepak Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 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 one case and allegation is of
recovery of 542.4 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 the seized
motorcycle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would
use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22760 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence, would get
implicated. It is further submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner
as alleged who also fled from the spot.
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.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 Dhaka P. S. Case No.54 of 2026, 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 one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22760 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
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 one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…