Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pramod MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to specified conditions.

Summary

Petitioner Pramod Mahto was arrested on 28‑02‑2026 in connection with an excise case involving the seizure of 1 litre of illegal chulai wine and 60 kg of fermented Jawa Mahua solution from a house that is jointly owned. He applied for bail, asserting a clean criminal record, false implication, and that he is not the absolute owner of the premises. The prosecution opposed the bail. The court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent, the non‑compliance of Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023, and his lack of exclusive ownership, and consequently granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and the circumstances of the seizure
  • Whether the non‑compliance of Sections 103/105 of the BNSS, 2023 and the petitioner’s lack of absolute ownership of the house warrant bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • excise offence
  • illegal liquor
  • Section 30(a)
  • clean antecedent
  • joint property
  • procedural non‑compliance

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22323 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Pramod Mahto Son of Jageshwar Sharma Resident of village- Koli, Ps- Halsi,
                 Dist- Lakhisarai

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-04-2026                     Heard Mr. Rabi Bhushan, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Narsingh Tanti, learned Additional Public

                   Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   28.02.2026 in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 123c2 of

                   2025, F.I.R. dated 27.02.2026 for the offences punishable under

                   Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                               3. Recovery is of 1 liter of country made illegal chulai

                   wine and 60 Kg fermented Jawa Mahua solution.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

                   implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears

                   from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been

                   recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22323 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                            2/3




          the recovery of 1 liter country made illegal chulai wine and 60

          kg fermented Jawa Mahua solution has been made from the

          house of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has

          no concern at all with the alleged recovery of the illicit liquor or

          the house/kitchen in question and the same is the joint house

          property of the petitioner and he is not the absolute owner of the

          house in question. He further submits that there is non-

          compliance of Section 103/105 of the BNSS, 2023. The

          petitioner is in custody since 28.02.2026.

                      5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          that the petitioner has clean antecedent, there is non-compliance

          of Section 103/105 of the BNSS, 2023 and he is not the absolute

          owner of the house in question, let the petitioner, above named,

          be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

          Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-

          VII-cum-Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Lakhisarai in

          connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 123c2 of 2025, subject to

          the following conditions:-

                        i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22323 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                       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.

                                    ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                       witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                       move for cancellation of bail.

                                   iii. 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 antecedent, 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)
Vanisha/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.