Santosh MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19101 of 2026
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2026 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Santosh Mahto Son of Chulhai Mahto R/O - Kanchanpur, P.S. - Bidupur,
                 Distt. - Vaishali

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Arya, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Ms. Pronoti Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-03-2026                      Heard Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Arya, learned counsel

                   for the petitioner and Ms. Pronoti Singh, learned APP for the

                   State.

                                 2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   01.02.2026, in connection with Digha P.S. Case No. 86 of 2026,

                   F.I.R. dated 01.02.2026 registered for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 30(a)\ of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.

                                 3. Recovery is of 2000 litres of country made liquor.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely

                   implicated in the present case.               He further submits that the

                   allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

                   petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.

                   In fact, nothing has been recovered from the conscious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19101 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                            2/3




          possession of the petitioner rather recovery has been made from

          the boat in question and the petitioner is not the owner of the

          boat in question. He further submits that co-accused person

          namely, Kishan Kumar who was apprehended along with the

          petitioner has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

          24.03.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18349 of 2026 and there is

          non compliance of Section 103 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and the

          petitioner is in custody since 01.02.2026.

                        5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

          State has vehemently opposed the prayer for             bail of the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

          and the fact that nothing has been recovered from the conscious

          possession of the petitioner and there is non-compliance of

          Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023 as well as similarly situated co-

          accused person has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of

          this Court, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail

          on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-II, Patna in connection

          with Digha P.S. Case No. 86 of 2026, subject to the following

          conditions :-
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19101 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                                           3/3




                                      (1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                         properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

                         and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

                         on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                         reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                      (2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                         witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                         for cancellation of bail.

                                      (3) And, further condition that the court below shall

                         verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                         any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                         criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for

                         cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner.             However, the

                         acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                         shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                         verification.



                                                                       (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-

U          T