Patna High Court
Manohar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Manohar Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act for alleged recovery of 25.5 litres of liquor from premises adjacent to his house. The petitioner argued that the liquor was not found in his possession, that the complainant (a local person and the chaukidar) had a hostile relationship with him, and that the FIR did not disclose the informant, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent. The order further stipulated that if more than one prior case is found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of recovered liquor in the petitioner’s possession affects the bail application.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent influences the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- bail bond
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10105 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-446 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran
======================================================
Manohar Mahto S/o Late Godhan Mahto Resident of Village- Manupur, P.S.-
Dighwara, Distt.- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-03-2026 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 one case and allegation is of
recovery of 25.5 litres of liquor from a place near the house of
the petitioner.
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 a place, which does not belong to the
petitioner, but then, is adjacent to his house and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10105 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of local person and Chaukikdar, but
then, it is submitted that petitioner is on an inimical term with
the Chaukidar. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence,
then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the
present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution and he came to be implicated at the instance of local
person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the name of
the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution and petitioner was not
implicated based on secret information.
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.5,000/- (Rupees 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 Dighwara P. S. Case No.446 of 2025, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10105 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
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 one case, 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 one case only, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…