Patna High Court
JITENDRA SAHNIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for petitioner no.2 and granted provisional anticipatory bail to petitioner no.1 subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Petitioners Jitendra Sahni and Arvind Sahni filed an anticipatory bail application in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act. Arvind was arrested while the application was pending, and the petitioners sought to withdraw his anticipatory bail request, which the Court permitted, dismissing that part of the application. The Court then considered Jitendra's request for anticipatory bail, noting his prior single case under the Excise Act and the circumstances of alleged recovery of liquor from a public area. The Court granted Jitendra provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, and directed verification of his criminal antecedents. The order also required the petitioners to deposit Rs.2,500 with the Advocates’ Association within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail application for petitioner no.2 (Arvind Sahni) can be withdrawn after his arrest.
- Whether petitioner no.1 (Jitendra Sahni) is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- What conditions must be imposed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS when granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- withdrawal of bail
- provisional bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5217 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2025 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. JITENDRA SAHNI S/o- Rajesh Sahni Resident of Gohda, P.S-
Musrigharari, Dist-Samastipur, Bihar
2. Arvind Sahni @ Arvind Kumar S/o- Jagarnath Sahni Resident of Gohda,
P.S- Musrigharari, Dist-Samastipur, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Keshav Bhardwaj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rana Randhir Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks
permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with
respect to petitioner no. 2 (Arvind Sahni @ Arvind Kumar), who
was arrested during pendency of the instant anticipatory bail
application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is
dismissed as withdrawn with respect to petitioner no. 2 (Arvind
Sahni @ Arvind Kumar).
5. The petitioner no. 1 apprehends his arrest in a case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5217 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 305.28 litres of liquor from a bush
near a garbage disposal building.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
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 is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated
based on secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone. It is further submitted that once an accused
is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,
local person, confessional statement or secret information
without holding a proper investigation.
8. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 trial court within
a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5217 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees
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 Musrigharari P.S. Case
No. 216 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
10. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one
case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of
seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this
Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has
antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
11. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners
based on instruction submits that petitioners undertake to deposit
an amount of Rs. 2,500/- with Advocates’ Association, Patna High
Court within a period of two weeks from today.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…