Patna High Court
Ravi Kumar Mahto @ Ravi MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that provisional anticipatory bail may be granted subject to a bail bond and verification of the petitioners’ criminal antecedents, with confirmation or cancellation thereafter.
Summary
The petitioners, three residents of Pandeypur, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged recovery of 50 litres of liquor. They contended that they were not caught in possession, the alleged liquor was recovered from a public place, and the complaint originated solely from a chowkidar whose prior knowledge was questionable. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The court examined the petitioners' clean antecedents (except one prior case) and the lack of direct recovery from them, and ordered provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bail bond with two sureties and subject to verification of their criminal records. The order further stipulated that if verification revealed undisclosed antecedents, the bail would be withdrawn; otherwise, it would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the allegations under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' criminal antecedents, if any, should preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the prosecution has established sufficient material to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- provisional bail
- police investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12612 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-413 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Ravi Kumar Mahto @ Ravi Mahto S/O Punyadev Mahto R/O Vill-
Pandeypur, P.S- Baniyapur, Dist- Saran at Chapra- 841403.
2. Raju Kumar @ Raju Mahto S/O Jhamlal Mahto R/O Vill- Pandeypur, P.S-
Baniyapur, Dist- Saran at Chapra- 841403.
3. Jitendra Kumar Mahto @ Jitendra Mahto S/O Manshi Mahto R/O Vill-
Pandeypur, P.S- Baniyapur, Dist- Saran at Chapra- 841403.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pronoti Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 and 2 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner no.3 has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 50 litres of liquor from sacks from two different
places. It is next submitted that petitioners were not arrested
from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12612 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place
which does not belong to the petitioners and is accessible to
public at large 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. It is
also submitted that once an accused is 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 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 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 Baniyapur P.S. Case No.413/2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12612 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
B.N.S.S.
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 petitioner no.1 and petitioner
no.2 has antecedent of even one case and petitioner no.3 has
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 respect to those petitioners whose
criminal antecedent does not tally but if after verification the
criminal antecedent as recorded hereinabove tallies with the
petitioners in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…