Patna High Court
Vijay SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Vijay Sahni, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of liquor from his residence. He argued that the recovery amount was erroneously recorded as 30 litres instead of 3 litres and that the house is a joint family property, making it uncertain that he had knowledge of the liquor. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if more than one antecedent case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, otherwise it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act involving alleged liquor recovery.
- Whether the joint family nature of the property negates the petitioner’s knowledge and culpability.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438(2)
- joint family property
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6990 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2025 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Vijay Sahni S/O Ram Sevak Sahni R/O Vill.- Jarang Baluaha@ Jarang
Baluaahan , P.S- Gaiyghat, Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umanath Mishra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 03 litres of liquor from the
house of the petitioner.
4. It is further submitted that impugned order
inadvertently records that 30 litres of liquor was recovered. It is
next submitted that even the house in question is a joint family
property and thus, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was
the petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6990 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
kept in the house was within his knowledge and he came to be
implicated at the instance of local person, but then, it is
submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that how
local villager would know who had concealed the liquor in the
house. 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court 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.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 Gaighat P. S. Case No.235 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6990 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
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 one case, 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 one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…