Patna High Court
Sanjay Mahto @ Sanjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Mahto, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Gaighat P.S. Case No.232 of 2025) under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly possessing 15 litres of illicit liquor allegedly recovered from a motorcycle. He contended that he was not present at the scene and that his name was mentioned only by a local watchman, asserting his innocence. The State opposed bail, highlighting that the petitioner has two other pending excise cases and is currently on bail in those matters, arguing that his criminal antecedent is not clean. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail, stating that the circumstances did not warrant it. However, the Court directed the trial court to entertain a regular bail application if the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, allowing the trial court to decide on merit without prejudice to the present order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act considering his alleged involvement in illicit liquor possession.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior pending excise cases and bail status constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- illicit liquor
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15884 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Sanjay Mahto @ Sanjay Kumar Son of Garbhu Mahto @ Garbhu Mahato R/o
Village - Hanuman Nagar, P.S. - Gaighat, Dist. - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kanhiya Kishor, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 25-03-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and
Learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Gaighat P.S. Case No.232 of 2025, for the offence
punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act, which is pending before the Court of Exclusive
Special Judge, Excise-III, Muzaffarpur.
3. As per the prosecution, the total recovery of 15
litres of illicit liquor have alleged to be made from a motorcycle,
which is the subject matter of the present case.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
also submits that petitioner was not present on the place of
occurrence and his name has been transpired only on suspicion
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15884 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
2/2
by local Chaukidar. He further submits that criminal antecedent
of the petitioner is not clean as there are two cases relating to
excise matter, pending against him in which he is on bail in all
cases.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that criminal antecedent of the
petitioner is not clean as there are two cases pending against
him and this aspect must be taken into consideration.
6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
7. However, trial court is directed to consider the
regular bail application of the petitioner, if he surrenders within
6 weeks from today and prays for regular bail, then trial court
shall pass order on merit without being prejudice of the present
order.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
prakashmani/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.