Patna High Court
Mantu Mahato @ Mantu Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, pending verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Mantu Mahato, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 10 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the liquor, is not the owner of the vehicle, and that the case is based solely on a confessional statement made by Bijesh while in police custody, which he claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs. 500 bond with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, directing the trial court to verify the petitioner’s antecedent before confirming the bail. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where the allegation is based on recovery of liquor from a vehicle not owned by the petitioner.
- Whether the reliance on a confessional statement made in police custody, without any seized possession, justifies granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent warrants provisional anticipatory bail pending verification.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- provisional bail
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11744 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Mantu Mahato @ Mantu Kumar Mahto S/O Brijkishore Mahto R/O Village-
Rupan Chhap, P.S.- Barauli, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pronoti Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 is not the owner of
the seized vehicle and came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Bijesh in police custody which does not
have any evidentiary value.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11744 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/2
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. 500/- (Rupees
Five Hundred) 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 Barauli P.S. Case No.
288 of 2025 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 even one case
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 is a
person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional
anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.