Patna High Court
Rajendra MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted as no offence under the Excise Act is made out and the petitioner has no antecedent, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Rajendra Mahto sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Turkauliya PS No. 492 of 2025) under sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 50 litres of country‑made liquor. The prosecution alleged that the police intercepted a vehicle and seized the liquor, but the petitioner claimed no liquor was found in his conscious possession and he has no criminal antecedent. Relying on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar (2019 (2) PLJR 1089), the petitioner argued that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar under Section 76(2) of the Excise Act when no offence is made out. The court, after considering the submissions and the precedent, held that the bail bar does not apply and, given the lack of possession and clean record, granted anticipatory bail with a set of conditions. The order directs that the petitioner be released on bail if arrested or surrendered within four weeks, subject to a bail bond and compliance with specified conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2) when no offence is made out.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of conscious possession of the alleged liquor and absence of criminal antecedent justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the Full Bench precedent in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar is applicable to the present facts.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 274, 275, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Section 76(2) bar
- no possession
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15960 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-492 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Rajendra Mahto Son of Late Shree Mahto Resident of Village - Shankar
Sariya Kasba Tola, P.S.- Turkauliya, District - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 492 of 2025 for the
offence under sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and
section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act lodged on
10.10.2025 by the informant, Raviranjan Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the Police intercepted the vehicle and there is
recovery/seizure of 50 liters country made liquor. This led to the
FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15960 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/4
he do not have criminal antecedent.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in
2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an
application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar
Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar
under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation
made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made
out.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that his
name has given by the locals.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that he do not have criminal antecedent, nothing has been
recovered from his conscious possession, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory
bail with conditions.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15960 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/4
satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise Court No.1, East
Champaran, Motihari in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case
No. 492 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for six months to mark his
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15960 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
4/4
(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…