Patna High Court
Raju MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with conditions, as the court found no sufficient ground to deny bail.
Summary
Petitioner Raju Mahto was arrested on 8 March 2026 in connection with the seizure of 85 litres of illicit country-made liquor alleged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. He contended that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was recovered from behind his house and not from his conscious possession, and that the investigating authorities failed to comply with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean record and the alleged procedural lapses, granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the Exclusive Special Judge (Excise)‑1st, Samastipur.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seizure of illicit liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS warrants bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of conscious possession affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- illicit liquor
- prohibition law
- Section 30(a)
- clean antecedent
- procedural non‑compliance
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25258 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2026 Thana- PUSA District- Samastipur
======================================================
Raju Mahto S/o Surat Mahto R/o vill - Bishanpur Bathua, ward no. 6, P.S.-
Pusa, Dist.- Samastipur, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Ms. Madhuri Lata, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
08.03.2026 in connection with Pusa P.S. Case No. 21 of 2026,
F.I.R. dated 02.03.2026 for the offences punishable under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 85 liters of illicit country made
liquor.
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.25258 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
the recovery has been made from behind the house of the
petitioner and the petitioner has been made accused merely on
the basis of suspicion. He further submits that there is non-
compliance of Section 103 and 105 of BNSS and the petitioner
is in custody since 08.03.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and there is non-compliance of
Section 103 and 105 of BNSS, 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 Exclusive Special Judge(Excise)-1st,
Samastipur in connection with Pusa P.S. Case No. 21 of 2026,
subject to the following conditions:-
i. 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.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25258 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…