Patna High Court

Ramesh SahversusThe state of Bihar

Decided: 29 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to verification of the petitioner's antecedents and compliance with the conditions imposed.

Summary

The petitioner, Ramesh Sah, was implicated in an excise case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of liquor recovered from his motorcycle and other locations. He argued that he had a clean antecedent and that the liquor was seized from his vehicle without his knowledge, as his cousin misused the vehicle. The State opposed his prayer for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds and two sureties, and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If any antecedent is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if none is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Whether ownership of the vehicle used in the alleged offence implicates the petitioner
What conditions should be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
liquor seizure
clean antecedent
Section 30
Section 482
provisional bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28796 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Ramesh Sah S/O Shiv Prasad Sah Resident of Village- Kanchanpur, P.S.
                 Sasaram, District- Rohtas

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Shashi Kant
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-04-2026                  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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 3.500 litres of liquor from a motorcycle, 3.800 litres

                   of liquor from possession of Shobhnath and 10 litres of liquor

                   from the house of Lalita Devi.                    It is next submitted 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

                   vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28796 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                            2/3




          his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would

          create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated.

          It is also submitted that the petitioner was completely unaware

          that his cousin brother Ajay would misuse his vehicle in the

          manner as alleged who was also apprehended from the spot.

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

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       5. 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 Excise Case No.808/2026, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                       6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

          shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

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

          case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had

          concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

          provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28796 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean

                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…