Patna High Court
Ram Kumar Mahto @ Ram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Ram Kumar Mahto sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 for allegedly recovering 80 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He asserted a clean criminal record, lack of ownership of the vehicle, and claimed that a watchman (chawkidar) falsely implicated him due to personal enmity. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of the petitioner’s antecedent by the trial court. If any prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if the petitioner is indeed clean, the bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of clean antecedent and lack of possession justifies anticipatory bail.
- Whether alleged false implication by a chawkidar affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- false implication
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent verification
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22363 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-481 Year-2024 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
Ram Kumar Mahto @ Ram Kumar S/O Mistri Mahto @ Mishari Mahato R/O
Vill.- Lalapur, P.S.- Marhowrah, Dist.- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raushan Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 1. 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 Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 80 litres of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom he is
on an inimical term. It is next submitted that it appears that the
Chawkidar, in order to save the real culprits, falsely implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22363 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
the petitioner, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean
antecedent and the police in mechanical manner relying on the
Chawkidar implicated the petitioner in the instant case.
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 appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let 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 Marhowrah P.S.
Case No. 481 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner
and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case,
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22363 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…