Ramashankar Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19784 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2025 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Ramashankar Sahani S/O Sajan Sahani Resident of Village - Majhariya, Police Station- Malahi,District - East Champaran at Motihari. 2.

Rambha Devi Sajan Sahani Resident of Village - Majhariya, Police StationMalahi,District - East Champaran at Motihari. 3.

Sajan Sahani Lalbahadur Sahani @ Lalabahadur Sahani Resident of Village - Majhariya, Police Station- Malahi,District - East Champaran at Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-03-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have antecedent of one case and petitioner no. 2 is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 35 litres of liquor concealed under straw in front of the house of the petitioners. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19784 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026 2/3 recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioners but then is adjacent to their house and they came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Tarkeshwar in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with.

5.

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

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, 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. 5,000/- (Rupees Five 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 Malahi P.S. Case No. 401 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

7.

It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of more than

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19784 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026 3/3 one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but after verification if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of one case in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T