Patna High Court
BALBIR SAHNIversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted in the present excise case, subject to verification of the petitioners' antecedents, under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Balbir Sahni and Mantosh Sahani applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of liquor from an orchard not belonging to them. They asserted they have clean antecedents, were not caught in possession, and were implicated solely on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing counsel, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 and two sureties, and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents, with confirmation of bail if they are found clean. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with a provision that any undisclosed antecedent would lead to denial of confirmation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Sections 30(a) and 36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' lack of possession and clean antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. empowers the court to grant provisional anticipatory bail pending verification of antecedents.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- Section 36
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90265 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-909 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. BALBIR SAHNI S/o Beni Sahni R/o village of Dakrama @ Dahrawan, PS-
Hathauri, District- Muzaffarpur
2. Mantosh Sahani S/O Shankar Sahani R/V - Dakrama @ Dahrawan, P.S.-
Hathauri, Dist. - Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shiva Shankar Sharma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 36 of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 31.5 litres of liquor along with 45 litres of spirit
from orchard of Ram Kishun Sahni. It is next submitted that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90265 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large and they have
no connection or relation with Ram Kishun Sahni and they came
to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest
way to implicate someone without holding a proper
investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) each 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 P.S. Case No.909/2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of
even one case, in that event, it would be presumed that
petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90265 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed with but if after verification it is found that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent, in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…