Patna High Court
Arjun sahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court permitted withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for the arrested petitioner and granted provisional anticipatory bail to the other petitioner subject to bond, sureties and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
Arjun Sahni and Dhruv Sahani filed an anticipatory bail application in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 274 and 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act. Dhruv Sahani was arrested while the application was pending, and the petitioners sought to withdraw his bail application, which the court permitted, dismissing that part of the petition. For Arjun Sahni, the court examined his claim of no possession and his five prior excise cases, and despite the State’s opposition, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs 25,000 with two sureties. The bail is subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and to verification of his criminal antecedent by the trial court; if more than five prior cases are found, the bail will not be confirmed, but if exactly five, it will be confirmed. The order thus withdraws the application for Dhruv and allows anticipatory bail for Arjun with stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the court may permit withdrawal of an anticipatory bail application for a petitioner who has already been arrested
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner facing charges under Sections 274, 275 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, considering his prior criminal antecedent
- What conditions should be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail in the present circumstances
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Narcotic offences
- bail conditions
- withdrawal of application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44082 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2026 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Arjun sahni son of Chandrika Sahani Resident of village - Jhakhiya, Ps-
Banjariya, Dist- East champaran
2. Dhruv Sahani son of Sukhari Sahani Resident of village - Jhakhiya, Ps-
Banjariya, Dist- East champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priyesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks
permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application
with respect to petitioner no.2, namely, Dhruv Sahani, who was
arrested during pendency of the instant anticipatory bail
application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed as
withdrawn with respect to petitioner no.2, namely, Dhruv
Sahani.
5. The petitioner no.1 seeks bail in anticipation of his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44082 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/4
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the
Excise Act.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 200 litres of liquor from sacks as
detailed in the FIR.
7. The 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 alleged
recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with
whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that police
in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the
behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and
confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding
a proper investigation.
8. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad
opposes the anticipatory bail application.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner no.1, above-named, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44082 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/4
below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) 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 Banjariya P. S. Case No.35 of 2026, subject to
the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
10. The application stands allowed.
11. It is made clear that the learned trial Court
after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event,
if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than five
cases, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes
of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent
before this Court, in that event, the present provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but if on
verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of five
cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44082 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
4/4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.