Patna High Court
Ujjal MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ujjal Mahto, sought anticipatory bail after the police recovered 3,300 litres of illicit liquor from four vehicles, one of which he owned. The prosecution alleged that the liquor was contraband under Sections 30(a), 34 and 36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The petitioner contended that he had purchased the vehicle in 2018, sold it to another person in 2019, and had no knowledge of or possession of the seized liquor. He also highlighted his clean criminal record. The court examined the nature of the offence, the large quantity of liquor seized, and the petitioner’s lack of direct involvement. Concluding that the seriousness of the allegations outweighed the petitioner's claims, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged possession of illicit liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- illicit liquor
- vehicle ownership
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14082 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-428 Year-2021 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Ujjal Mahto S/o Balram Mahto R/o 262 A/B Sonari, Jamshedpur, P.S.- Sonari,
District- Jamshedpur, State- Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Upadhyay, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 27-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 34
and 36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per prosecution case, 3300 litres of illicit liquor
was recovered from four different vehicles. Petitioner is the
owner of one of the seized vehicles.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner has no concern with the seized
liquor or vehicle. Petitioner has purchased the seized Tata Sumo
vehicle bearing registration no. JH05CB4246 through Tata
Motors Finance Ltd. Jamshedpur, Jharkhand on 20.04.2018 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14082 of 2026(2) dt.27-04-2026
2/2
later on sold the said vehicle to one Md. Wasid Ansari on
03.10.2019 through stamp paper and handed over the vehicle to
Md. Wasid Ansari the same day along with signed prescribed
performa for registration of vehicle. Nothing has been recovered
from the conscious possession of this petitioner. Petitioner has
no criminal antecedent.
5. Considering the nature of accusation and quantity
of recovery from different vehicles, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…