Rambabu Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28059 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- MAHINDWARA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Rambabu Sahni Son of Raghuwar Sahni @ Raghuni Sahani Resident of village - Koahi, P.S.- Mahindwara, District - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Shaheen Begum ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(A) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of seven cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 501 litres of liquor from straw house of Krishna Mohan.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from straw house of Krishna Mohan and petitioner has no relation with Krishna Mohan, but then he came to be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28059 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 2/3 implicated based on confessional statement of Krishna Mohan in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It is next submitted that police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation. It is further submitted that petitioner in similar manner earlier also came to be implicated in cases relating to Excise.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand) 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 Mahindwara P. S. Case No.31 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28059 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026 3/3

7. The application stands allowed.

8. 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 more than seven cases, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining 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 has antecedent of seven cases, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T