Patna High Court
Ajit SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and verification of antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajit Sahni, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging violation of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for storing and selling illicit liquor. The prosecution’s case was based on a secret informant’s tip that a large quantity of country-made liquor was found in a pit near an orchard, and that the petitioner’s name was mentioned by the informant and a local watchman, although he was not present at the scene. The petitioner argued that the liquor was recovered from an open area not belonging to him and that there was no direct evidence of his involvement, despite having two prior similar cases pending on bail. The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner’s criminal antecedents indicated a likelihood of reoffending. The court, after reviewing the material, held that the lack of direct participation and the open nature of the seizure site warranted bail, but imposed a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions for verification of his antecedents under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement, based solely on secret information, justifies denial of bail.
- Whether prior criminal antecedents in similar cases preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35755 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2026 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Ajit Sahni S/o Gariban Sahni Resident of Village- Tataila, P.S.- Kamtaul,
Dist- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saurav Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 26-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 19 of 2026, for
allegedly having committed offence under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, which has been
lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the
informant to the effect that on 24.01.2026 at around 10:05 A.M.,
he along with other police personnel proceeded for maintaining
law and order duty on the occasion of Saraswati Puja and for
conducting raid against illegal liquor trade. At around 11:30
A.M., he received a secret information that Ajit Sahni (petitioner
herein), Hriday Sahni, Suresh Sahni and Raju Sahni were
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35755 of 2026(2) dt.26-05-2026
2/4
storing a large quantity of country made liquor in a pit near the
orchard of Bhikari Sahni and are engaged in selling of illegal
liquor. To verify the authenticity of the said information, the
informant along with police personnel reached there. Upon
seeing the police vehicle, five-six persons started running away
and despite chase they managed to escape. Upon search being
made of the place, total 70 liters of country made liquor was
recovered and a seizure list was accordingly prepared. During
course of seizure, the name of petitioner and other transpired,
who fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that total 70 liters of country made liquor was recovered from a
pit near the orchard of one Bhikari Sahni, from which the
petitioner has got no concern. He further submits that the liquor
was seized from an open place, which is accessible to all. The
name of the petitioner transpired in the present case, on the
secret information received by the informant and the local
chaukidar, who disclosed the name of the petitioner and other
persons, who managed to escape from the place of occurrence.
Neither the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence, nor
he was involved in any trade of illegal liquor. The petitioner is
an accused in two other cases of similar nature, in which he is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35755 of 2026(2) dt.26-05-2026
3/4
on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned APP for the State
vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner is an accused in two cases of similar
nature and there is every probability that on his release on
anticipatory bail, he will again indulge in same activity of
selling illegal/illicit liquor.
6. Having heard the rival submissions and after
going through the records, it appears that the petitioner was not
present at the place of occurrence. His name transpired in the
present case, only on the basis of secret information and the
identification made by the local chaukidar. The alleged liquor
was recovered from an open place, which does not belong to the
petitioner. The petitioner has got two criminal antecedents of
similar nature. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
In-charge Special Judge-I (Excise Act), Darbhanga in
connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 19 of 2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35755 of 2026(2) dt.26-05-2026
4/4
B.N.S.S., with further condition:
(1) The learned Court concerned shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it
is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedents, the court concerned shall take steps for cancellation
of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail
bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be
delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Ritesh Kumar, J)
Ajay/Mridula/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.