Patna High Court
Subodh MahatoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedents and compliance with the conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Subodh Mahato, the owner of a Honda car, was implicated in a case (PS Case No.893/2018) for the alleged recovery of 280 litres of spirit-like substance from his vehicle. He was not arrested at the spot and the substance was not found in his conscious possession; the prosecution’s case rests on his ownership of the vehicle. Mahato, who has a clean antecedent, applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that he was unaware of any misuse of his car by a person named Rajesh. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, applying Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Sale and Service (B.N.S.S.) Act, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of his criminal antecedents, with confirmation contingent on a clean record.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail when the alleged contravention involves a vehicle he owns but did not personally possess the seized substance.
- Whether ownership of the vehicle alone suffices to implicate the petitioner under Sections 272, 273 IPC and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- vehicle ownership
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- IPC sections 272 273
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16548 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-893 Year-2018 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Subodh Mahato son of Moti Mahato @ Motilal Mahato Residene Of Village -
Bedaulia, Paterhi (Pateri), Bhaikhan ( Aniruda Belsar (Pateri), Ps- Belsar,
Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273
IPC and Sections 30(A) and 41(1) of Bihar Prohibition and
Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 280 litres of spirit like substance from a Honda car.
It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot
as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession
and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is owner
of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16548 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get
implicated. It is further submitted that the petitioner was
completely unaware that Rajesh would misuse his vehicle in the
manner as alleged, who was also apprehended from the spot.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) 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 Motipur P.S. Case No.893/2018, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one
case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16548 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean
antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…