Patna High Court
Arun SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted in the absence of proven conscious possession, subject to a bail bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Arun Sahni applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act alleging recovery of 35 litres of liquor from his joint‑family house. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not found in his conscious possession, and that the post‑2018 amendment to the Excise Act has abolished the doctrine of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and the conditions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order was made conditional: if any antecedent is discovered, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when alleged possession of liquor is not proven and the doctrine of deemed possession has been abolished.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to provisional bail pending verification of his criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- prohibition and excise
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90451 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2025 Thana- SIWAIPATTI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Arun Sahni S/O Bhikhari Sahni R/O Mohalla- Tengari Tola Dhaphar, P.S.-
Siwaipatti, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 35 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner. It
is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot,
as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession
and the house in question is a joint family property, as such, it
cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had
kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was
within his knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90451 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed
offender has been done away with and petitioner 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. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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-bond in the
sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge Excise Court No.-III, Muzaffarpur in connection
with Siwaipatti P.S. Case No.188 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, then it
would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90451 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…