Patna High Court
Rambabu SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail, directing provisional bail bonds subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Rambabu Sahni, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(A) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 501 litres of liquor from a straw house belonging to Krishna Mohan. The petitioner argued that he was not arrested at the scene, had no possession of the liquor, and was implicated solely on the basis of a confessional statement made by Krishna Mohan in police custody, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value, especially after the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act that abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioner’s antecedent of seven prior excise cases. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.35,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent; if more than seven prior cases are found, the bail may be withdrawn. The order was made subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC for alleged offences under Section 30(A) of the Excise Act.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co-accused, made in police custody, can form a basis for implicating the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner’s antecedent of seven prior excise cases precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(A)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(A)
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28059 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- MAHINDWARA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Rambabu Sahni Son of Raghuwar Sahni @ Raghuni Sahani Resident of
village - Koahi, P.S.- Mahindwara, District - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Shaheen Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-04-2026 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 seven cases under the Excise
Act and allegation is of recovery of 501 litres of liquor from
straw house of Krishna Mohan.
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 even alleged
recovery is from straw house of Krishna Mohan and petitioner
has no relation with Krishna Mohan, but then he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28059 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
2/3
implicated based on confessional statement of Krishna Mohan
in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value
and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of
deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away
with. It is next submitted that police in majority of cases
implicating innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar,
local person, secret information and confessional statement in a
mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation. It is
further submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also
came to be implicated in cases relating to Excise.
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.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty 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 Mahindwara P. S. Case No.31 of 2026, subject
to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28059 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
3/3
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 seven cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
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 seven cases, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…