Patna High Court

Vilat MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Vilat Mukhiya, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act concerning the alleged recovery of 21 litres of liquor from a field adjacent to his house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, he has a clean antecedent, and the complaint was filed by a hostile neighbour rather than any prior knowledge of his involvement. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court, considering the petitioner's clean record and lack of direct possession, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.500 bond, two sureties, and verification of his antecedents by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would be revoked, otherwise it would be confirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
Whether the alleged recovery of liquor from a field adjacent to the petitioner’s house constitutes sufficient grounds for arrest.

Legislation cited

Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Bihar Excise Act
Section 30(a)
clean antecedent
liquor seizure
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24538 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2025 Thana- PUNAURA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Vilat Mukhiya S/o Yadu Mukhiya @ Jadu Mukhiya R/o Village - Ranjitpur
                 East Vinama Tola Ward No. 1, P.S- Punaura, District - Sitamarhi

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-04-2026                  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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 21 liters of liquor from a field behind the house of

                   the petitioner.

                                4. Learned     counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was not apprehended 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 implicated at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24538 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                            2/3




          the instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term.

          It is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the

          involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did

          not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR

          which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

                       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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court

          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 Punaura

          P.S. Case No. 246 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

                       7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the

          event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case

          then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the purposes of

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24538 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a

                      person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                      anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                        (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…