Patna High Court
Jitendra SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bail bond conditions and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Jitendra Sahani and Sukai Mukhiya, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for allegedly recovering 50 litres of liquor from the bank of the Tilave river. They contended that the liquor was not in their conscious possession, the site was a public place, and the complaint originated from a hostile chowkidar, raising doubts about the propriety of the investigation. The State opposed the bail application. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on the petitioners furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000 each with two sureties and subject to verification of their criminal antecedents under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Criminal Procedure Code. The Court further stipulated that if any petitioner is found to have concealed prior cases, the bail would not be confirmed for that individual. The order directs the trial court to confirm the bail if the antecedent verification is satisfactory.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 274, 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a public place and the circumstances of the complaint justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- public place
- police investigation
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25682 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Jitendra Sahani S/o- Rameshwar Sahani R/v- Chichiurahiya Ps- Banjariya
District- East Champaran, Motihari
2. Sukai Mukhiya S/o- Banarsi Mukhiya R/v- Chichiurahiya Ps- Banjariya
District- East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State, Sri Rabindra Kumar.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274 and
275 of BNS and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner
no. 2 has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases are
under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 50 litres of
liquor from bank of Tilave river.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25682 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
petitioners and is accessible to public at large and they came to
be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom they are
on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if Chowkidar was
aware about the involvement of the petitioners in the
occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to
institution of the instant FIR, which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police
starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of
Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret
information without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25682 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
court in connection with Banjariya P.S. Case No. 19 of 2026
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of even
one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than three
cases then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes
of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before
this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not
be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his
criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is
found that petitioner no. 1 is a person with clean antecedent and
petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of three cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…