Patna High Court
Lakhan Kumar Sahni @ Lakhan KumarversusThe 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 antecedent.
Summary
Lakhan Kumar Sahni applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for allegedly possessing 40 litres of liquor recovered from a motorcycle. He asserted that he has a clean criminal record, was not arrested on the spot, did not have conscious possession of the liquor, and is not the owner of the vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is discovered, the bail may be revoked; otherwise, it will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of a clean antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30(a)
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Bihar Excise
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7418 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE GOGRI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Lakhan Kumar Sahni @ Lakhan Kumar S/o- Sunil Sahni R/v- Swrnpuri
Itmadi PS - Beldaur Dist- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vidyapati, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 40 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted that
petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to be
implicated based on the secret information which is the easiest way
to implicate someone without holding a proper investigation, when
petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7418 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/2
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event
of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be
released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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 Gogri Excise P.S. Case
No. 130 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, it would be presumed
that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this Court at para
3 of the anticipatory bail application in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on
verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that
event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…