Patna High Court
Mantu MahatoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedent, to be confirmed if the petitioner has a clean record.
Summary
The petitioner, Mantu Mahato, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, where police alleged recovery of liquor from a hut owned by a third party and a roadside location. He argued he had no possession of the liquor, was not arrested at the scene, and the alleged recovery was unrelated to him; moreover, the confessional statement of a co-accused in custody was deemed inadmissible. The petitioner also contended that the 2018 amendment to the Excise Act abolished the concepts of deemed possession and presumed offender. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs. 500 bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, with the order to be confirmed if he is found to have a clean record and otherwise to be withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act where no possession is established.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co-accused in police custody has evidentiary value.
- Effect of the 2018 amendment removing deemed possession and presumed offender on bail considerations.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- possession
- confessional statement
- Section 30(a)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17020 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2025 Thana- SIDHWALIYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Mantu Mahato S/O Bineshwar Mahato R/O Village- Jhajhawa, P.S-
Sidhwalya, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pronoti Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 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 Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 43.2 liters of liquor from a hut of Lalan and 5 liters
of liquor from a place near road side.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
as petitioner has no concern or relation with Lalan who came to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17020 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
be implicated based on confessional statement of Prakash in
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is
next submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the
year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed
offender has been done away with.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. 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 Sidhwaliya P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025 subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even
one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17020 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if 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)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…