Patna High Court
LAL SAHEB SINGHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Lal Saheb Singh, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with an offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of liquor from a vehicle he owned. He argued that he was not in possession of the liquor at the time of seizure and was unaware of any misuse of his vehicle by a third party. 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, whereas confirmation would follow if only one antecedent case is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC in view of the alleged offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act and his criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7444 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-320 Year-2023 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Rohtas
======================================================
LAL SAHEB SINGH S/o Ramayan Singh Resident of Mohalla -
Chandravanshi Nagar, Near Shershah Hotel Sasaram, Police Station-
Darigaon Sasaram, District- Rohtas Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem
======================================================
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 and allegation is of
recovery of 15 litres of liquor from an auto, 13.900 litres of
liquor from the house of Santosh Kumar Chaudhary.
4. 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 he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7444 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create
evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. It is
further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware that
Mangru Ram would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged
as he was also apprehended at the spot.
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 Excise Case No.736 of 2023, FIR No.320 of 2023, 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
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7444 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
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…