Patna High Court
GUDDU MAHTOversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to conditions and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent cases.
Summary
The petitioner, Guddu Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, alleging recovery of 26.280 litres of liquor from a location adjacent to his house. He argued that the liquor was not found in his possession, that the complainant (a watchman) had a personal enmity with him, and that the watchman’s failure to inform police earlier suggested a false implication. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioner’s prior two cases under the Excise Act. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. The order further stipulated that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas confirmation would follow if only two antecedent cases are verified.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a location not in the petitioner’s possession justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17330 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2026 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Guddu Mahto S/O Sri Anirudh Mahto R/O Vill - Fuliakhand, P.S.- Bairiya,
Distt.- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/S
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sharad Kumar Verma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Parmanand Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 26.280 litres of liquor from a
place near the house of the petitioner.
4. The 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, but then, is adjacent to his house and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17330 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an
inimical term. It is further submitted that if Chaukidar was
aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence,
then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the
present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the
prosecution. It is next submitted that it appears that the
Chaukidar in order to save the real culprit falsely implicated the
petitioner, since petitioner has antecedent under the Excise Act.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) 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 Bairiya P. S. Case No.93 of 2026, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17330 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…