Patna High Court

Pappu SahaniversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 28 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Pappu Sahani, sought anticipatory bail after fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 91.25 litres of liquor from a rented house. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, the liquor was not found in his possession, and the case was based solely on a confessional statement of an apprehended accused, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The petitioner also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a modest bail bond and two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. If the trial court finds a clean record, the provisional order will be confirmed; otherwise, it will not be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act
Whether the confessional statement of an apprehended accused can form the basis for arrest without possession
Effect of the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession on bail considerations

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
possession
confessional statement
provisional bail
criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28218 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2026 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Pappu Sahani S/O Samapt Lal Sahani Resident of Village- Banmankhi, Ward
                 No. 15, P.S- Banmankhi, Distt.- Purnea.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Sumit Kumar Bhagat
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Arun Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   28-04-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

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

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 91.250 litres of liquor from rented house of Kunal

                   Komal.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged

                   recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner

                   and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28218 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                            2/3




          apprehended-accused in police custody which does not have any

          evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in

          the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed

          possession and presumed offender has been done away with.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                   6.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Sadar P.S. Case No. 7 of 2026, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case

          then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

          person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28218 of 2026(2) dt.28-04-2026
                                                          3/3




                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…