Patna High Court
Raja Safi @ Praveen Kumar SafiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that, given the absence of any seizure from the petitioner's conscious possession and his clean antecedent, anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 438 CrPC, subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Raja Safi sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving the seizure of 450 litres of Nepali liquor, alleged under Sections 275, 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He contended that he had a clean antecedent, no liquor was found in his conscious possession, and his name was recorded only on the basis of a co‑accused's statement, with procedural lapses under Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS. The State opposed bail, invoking Section 76(2) of the Prohibition and Excise Act. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, the court granted anticipatory bail, imposing a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC. The order required the petitioner’s cooperation in trial, prohibited tampering with evidence, and allowed bail cancellation if a concealed criminal antecedent emerged.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC despite allegations under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s inclusion as an accused based solely on a co‑accused’s disclosure satisfies the requirements of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103, 105, 275, 3(5)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 76(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- seizure of liquor
- false implication
- co‑accused testimony
- Section 438 CrPC
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39755 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2026 Thana- BHAIRAVSHTHAN District- Madhubani
======================================================
Raja Safi @ Praveen Kumar Safi Son of Suresh Safi Resident of Village-
Vatsimar, P.S. Rajnagar, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Bhairab Asthan P.S. Case No. 17 of 2026
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 275, 3(5)
of B.N.S. and 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of total 450 liters of Nepali liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and has falsely been implicated
in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as
alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. Learned counsel for
the petitioners further submits that it appears from the FIR and
seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious
possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39755 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
2/4
from the vehicle. Learned counsel for the petitioner next
submits that name of the petitioner has transpired in the present
case on the basis of disclosure made by apprehended co-accused
person, namely, Vijay Kumar Jha and there is non-compliance
of mandatory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS,
2023.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the
pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable.
6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full
Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar
reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on
behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant
of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
counsel for the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been
recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the
petitioner has clean antecedent and petitioner has been made an
accused in the present merely on the basis of disclosure made by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39755 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
3/4
apprehended co-accused person, namely, Vijay Kumar Jha, let
the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days
from the date of receipt of the order, 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
Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Court, Madhubani in
connection with Bhairab Asthan P.S. Case No. 17 of 2026,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following
conditions:-
1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall
be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the
court and shall remain physically present as directed by the
court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without
sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court
below.
2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
3. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39755 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
4/4
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.