Patna High Court
SAKAL MAHATOversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents, with possible cancellation if antecedent thresholds are exceeded.
Summary
The petitioners, Sakal Mahato and Ramroop Mahato, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. They argued that they were not arrested at the scene, no liquor was recovered from their possession, and the alleged recovery was from a hut not owned by them, with the investigation based on secret information. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after hearing counsel, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000 each with two sureties, and directed verification of their criminal antecedents. It stipulated that if petitioner 1 has more than two prior cases or petitioner 2 has more than four, the bail would be presumed concealed and could be revoked. Upon verification, if antecedents match the stated numbers, the provisional bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act given their prior criminal antecedents and the circumstances of the alleged offence.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
- secret information
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14242 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-273 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. SAKAL MAHATO S/O LATE RAGHUNI MAHTO Resident of village-
Bajidpur, P.s.- Madhuban, District- East Champaran
2. RAMROOP MAHATO S/O BACHCHAN MAHATO Resident of village-
Bajidpur, P.s.- Madhuban, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aditya Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-03-2026 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 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of four cases, out of which,
two cases are under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery
of 20 litres of liquor from a hut. It is next submitted that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14242 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
2/3
recovery is from a hut which does not belong to the petitioner as
it has been specifically stated at Para-9 of the anticipatory bail
application and they came to be implicated based on secret
information which is the easiest way to implicate someone. 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.20,000/- (Rupees twenty 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 Excise P.S. Case No.273/2020, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14242 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
3/3
and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent
of more than two cases and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of
more than four cases, 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…