Patna High Court
GANESH MUKHIYA @ GANESH BINversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bail bond conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ganesh Mukhiya, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 30(a), 30(b), 30(c), 32 and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of liquor and seizure of breweries. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, nothing was found in his conscious possession, and that the seized premises did not belong to him. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order also directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and conditionally confirm the bail if he has no more than two prior cases, otherwise the bail would not be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in offences under the Bihar Excise Act where the accused claims no possession of the seized goods.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code may be imposed on anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- Section 482(2) CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7123 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2022 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
GANESH MUKHIYA @ GANESH BIN S/o- Bhajan Mukhiya @ Bhajan
Mukhiya R/v- Koirgawa Bintoli Ps- Sangrampur Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suraj Kumar Tiwari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pronoti Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 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 30(a),
30(b), 30(c), 32 and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 40 litres of liquor from village
Koirgawa Bintoli along with 3300 litres of semi-manufactured
liquor solution, which was destroyed and 5 breweries were also
seized.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7123 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner
of the seized breweries, but then it is submitted that petitioenr is
not owner of any of the seized breweries. It is further 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. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten 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 Sangrampur P.S. Case
No. 8 of 2022 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 two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7123 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
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 two cases in that event the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…