Patna High Court
Sadab FaisalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner, subject to verification of his antecedent, as ownership of the vehicle alone does not constitute sufficient evidence of guilt.
Summary
The petitioner, Sadab Faisal, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in an excise case involving the alleged recovery of 198 litres of liquor from his Ertiga vehicle. He argued that he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware that the driver, Vikash, misused his vehicle. The State opposed the bail, contending that the vehicle's ownership linked the petitioner to the offence under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act. The Court, considering the petitioner's claims, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bond and sureties, and conditioned the order on verification of his criminal antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail despite being the owner of the vehicle from which liquor was allegedly recovered
- Whether ownership of the vehicle constitutes sufficient grounds for arrest under the Bihar Excise Act
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession justify granting anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- vehicle ownership
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85713 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-398 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Gaya
======================================================
Sadab Faisal Son of Md. Tanweer R/o Nezam Nagar, Near Gulsul Bara
Maszid, PS. - Hind Piri, Dist. - Ranchi(Jharkhand).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Diwakar Upadhyaya
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 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 offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and
32(3) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 198 litres of liquor from an Ertiga car.
4. 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 he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized
vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use
his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and thus would
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85713 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated,
it is further submitted that petitioner was completely unaware
that Vikash would misuse the vehicle in the manner as alleged,
who was also apprehended from the spot.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 trial court
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 Excise
(Gaya) P.S. Case No. 398 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 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 in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even 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 is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85713 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.