Patna High Court
Mukesh Mukhiya @ Mukesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court provisionally granted anticipatory bail subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of antecedents, with confirmation contingent on the findings.
Summary
Mukesh Mukhiya sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, where 50 litres of liquor were allegedly recovered from a motorcycle not owned by him. He claimed the police implicated him based on a chowkidar’s information without proper investigation and that he was not in possession of the seized vehicle. The State opposed the bail. The High Court granted provisional anticipatory bail on condition of furnishing a Rs.5,000 bail bond with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify his criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail would be presumed concealed and the order would not be confirmed; if only one prior case, the bail would be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the pending excise case.
- Whether the circumstances of alleged seizure and lack of arrest on spot justify bail.
- Whether the trial court should verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents before confirming bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- liquor seizure
- Section 30
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12359 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-711 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Mukesh Mukhiya @ Mukesh Kumar Son of Shankar Mukhiya Resident Of
Village -Basantpur Bintoli Ps- Muffasil Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Vikram, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 50 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
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 the seized vehicle and he came to be
implicated at the instance of chowkidar with whom he is on an
inimical term. It is also submitted that once an accused is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12359 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
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.5000/- (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 Muffasil P.S. Case No.711/2025, 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
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner 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 one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12359 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
case, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…