Patna High Court
CR. MISC./56018/2026 of Gopal Sahani Vs The State of Bihar on 18 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56018 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2026 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Gopal Sahani S/o Late Bihari Sahani Resident of Village- Sukhlahiya, P.S.- Darpa, District-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56018 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2026 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran ======================================================
Gopal Sahani S/o Late Bihari Sahani Resident of Village- Sukhlahiya, P.S.- Darpa, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Shaheen Begum, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
18-08-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274 and 275 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of four cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 30 liters of liquor from house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended 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 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56018 of 2026(2) dt.18-08-2026
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 the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that it does not appear proabable that Chowkidar would have known who had concealed the liquor in the house. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local person, confessional statement or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
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 Trial Court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56018 of 2026(2) dt.18-08-2026
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No. 110 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than four cases then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of four cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
Rishabh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T