Patna High Court
Rajiv Kumar @ Rajiv SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted where the petitioner has a clean antecedent and no direct possession of the alleged contraband, subject to verification and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajiv Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018, alleging recovery of 171 litres of liquor from a hut not owned by him. He asserted a clean criminal record and no direct possession or relationship with the alleged liquor. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.500, two sureties, and a deposit of Rs.1,500 with the Patna High Court Advocate Association. The order also directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent; if any prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed. Thus, the petitioner was released on provisional anticipatory bail pending verification.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. in the pending excise case
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of direct possession and clean antecedent justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3323 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Samastipur
======================================================
Rajiv Kumar @ Rajiv Sahni S/o Maghnu Dwar Sahni @ Meghan Sahni R/o
Village - Bujurdwar @ Bujurgdwar Ward No. 12, P.S - Khanpur, District -
Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bindeswari Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 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 the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 171 litres of liquor from the hut of Savita Devi.
4. 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 the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and petitioner has no concern or relation with Savita Devi. It is
further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3323 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
the secret information which is the easiest way to implicate
someone.
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, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his 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.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 Town
Excise P.S. Case No. 298 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
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his 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 petitioner is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3323 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
based on instruction submits that petitioner undertakes to
deposit an amount of Rs.1,500/- with the Advocate Association
of the Patna High Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…