Raghuveer Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act, petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of three cases out of which two cases are under the Excise Act and petitioner no. 3 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 130 litres of liquor from a place near the bond on the bank of Gandak River.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8950 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026 2/3

¶23

petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to villagers at large. It is further submitted that petitioners came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom they are on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioners in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local person, secret information or confessional statement without holding a proper investigation of the case.

¶24

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

¶25

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8950 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026 3/3

¶27

Thousand) 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 Hajipur Sadar (Kajipur) P.S. Case No. 01 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

¶28

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more than two cases, petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than three cases and petitioner no. 3 has antecedent of of even one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their 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 no. 1 has antecedent of only two cases, petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of only three cases and petitioner no. 3 is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶29

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶30

Kundan/-

¶31

U T

Raghuveer Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghuveer Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brajesh Kumar @ Mona Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mithilesh Kumar @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sameer Rai Vs The State Of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar