Patna High Court
Rajan MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Rajan Mahto sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after an FIR alleged that 39 litres of country-made liquor were recovered from the roof of his house. The prosecution argued that the liquor was found on his premises, while the petitioner contended that nothing was seized from his conscious possession and that he was being named due to prior criminal antecedents. The petitioner relied on the Patna High Court’s decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which held that anticipatory bail can be granted despite the bar in Section 76(2) if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. The court, considering these submissions, granted anticipatory bail with a set of conditions including bond, sureties, regular appearances before police and court, and non‑interference with witnesses. The order directed that the bail be effective upon arrest or surrender within four weeks of the order.
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).
- Whether the FIR allegations constitute an offence under Section 30(a) sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the recovery of liquor from the roof of the petitioner’s house implicates him when no possession is established.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- seizure
- conscious possession
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21614 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2026 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Rajan Mahto S/O Chandra Mohan Dhangad @ Chandrmohan Dhangad R/O
Village- Bakhariya Dhangar Toli, P.S.- Majhuliya, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Ramesh Chandra, learned APP
representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 90 of 2026 for the
offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act lodged on 27.01.2026 by the informant, Nilesh Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on secret information raided the place and there is
recovery/seizure of 39 liter country made liquor from the
accused house roof top, the Mahal Chowkidar named this
petitioner. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21614 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
has criminal antecedent and that allowed the Chowkidar to
named him every time, nothing has been recovered/seized from
his conscious possession and anyone can throw/keep the bottle
on the roof top for implication.
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 the
recovery is from the roof top of the petitioner’s house.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21614 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Court-II,
Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Majhauliya P.S.
Case No. 90 of 2026 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21614 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.