Patna High Court
Raju MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Raju Mahto and Dharmveer Mahto, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 274, 275 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and Section 30(a). They contended that the liquor allegedly recovered from their houses was part of joint family property, that no arrest was made at the scene, and that there was no conscious possession, especially after the 2018 amendment that abolished the concept of deemed possession. The prosecution, represented by the State, opposed the bail, relying on the FIR lodged by a chowkidar. The Court noted the lack of direct evidence of possession, the questionable credibility of the informant, and the statutory changes, and therefore granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties. The order further directed the trial court to verify the petitioners' criminal antecedents and conditionally confirm the bail based on that verification. Thus, the petitioners were released on provisional anticipatory bail pending further scrutiny.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail in the case under Sections 274, 275 BNS and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Whether the amendment removing deemed possession affects the prosecution's case
- Whether the informant's testimony is sufficient to justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor possession
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1041 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-327 Year-2025 Thana- BABUBARHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Raju Mahto Son of Bhagwat Mahto Resident of Village- Barail, P.S.-
Babubarhi, District- Madhubani
2. Dharmveer Mahto Son of Bhagwat Mahto Resident of Village- Barail, P.S.-
Babubarhi, District- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Soban Asghar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 274, 275
BNS and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have antecedent of one case but then they were
acquitted and allegation is of recovery of 18.60 litres of liquor
from the house of petitioner no.1 and 37.2 litres of liquor from
the house of petitioner no.2. It is next submitted that petitioners
were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered
from their conscious possession and the house in question is a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1041 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
joint family property as such it cannot be alleged 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 they 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
he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant
FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) each 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
Babubarhi P.S. Case No.327/2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1041 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of
more than one case, in that event, it would be presumed that
petitioners had concealed their antecedent before this court, as
such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
confirmed with but if after verification, it is found that
petitioners have antecedent of one case, in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.