Patna High Court – Orders
Sandip Safi vs The State Of Bihar on 9 March, 2026
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9048 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani
======================================================
Sandip Safi S/o Sitaram Safi R/o Village - Budhan Jha Tole Pandaul, P.S -
Pandaul, District - Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-03-2026
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 offence punishable under Sections 30(a),
41(1), 31(1), 31(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of eight cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 3062.52 litres of liquor from two
Scorpio vehicle. It is next submitted that petitioner was not
arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his
conscious possession and is not the owner of any of the seized
vehicle and he came to be implicated at the instance of
chowkidar but then it is submitted that if chowkidar was aware
of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9048 of 2026(3) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
he did not inform the police prior to 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 starts implicating mechanically
either through chowkidar, local person, confessional statement
or secret information without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty 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 Pandaul P.S. Case No.283/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
eight cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9048 of 2026(3) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of eight
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T