Dinesh SahniversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2666 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-404 Year-2025 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
           1.     Dinesh Sahni S/o- Kishori Sahni Resident of Village- Rampur Koriya, P.S.-
                  Nanpur, Dist- Sitamarhi
           2.    Mukesh Sahni S/o- Fakira Sahni Resident of Village- Rampur Koriya, P.S.-
                 Nanpur, Dist- Sitamarhi
           3.     Mukesh Sahni @ Manoj Sahni S/o- Jamun Sahni Resident of Village-
                  Rampur Koriya, P.S.- Nanpur, Dist- Sitamarhi
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-01-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners no. 1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and

                   petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of

                   recovery of 30 litres of liquor from a place near an orchard.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was

                   recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2666 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                            2/3




          recovery is from a place which does not belong to the

          petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further

          submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance

          of the Chawkidar but then it is submitted that if the Chawkidar

          was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the

          occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the

          institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the

          case of the prosecution.

                       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, let the petitioners above-named, in

          the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial

          court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

          provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each 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

          Nanpur P.S. Case No. 404 of 2025, subject to the conditions as

          laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the

          BNSS.

                       7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2666 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and

                     if it is found that petitioners no. 1 and 2 have antecedent even

                     one case and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of more than one

                     case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their

                     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

                     petitioners no. 1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and

                     petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of only one case in that event the

                     provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

                                  8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners

                     based on instruction submits that petitioners undertake to

                     deposit an amount of Rs.2,500/- with the Advocate Association

                     of the Patna High Court.


                                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T