Patna High Court
Ramesh MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Mahto, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 for alleged possession of liquor recovered from a neighbour’s house, his own shop and a motorcycle. He contended that he has a clean antecedent, that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that it may have been left by customers in the vicinity of his shop. The State opposed his application for anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and conditioned the order on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If any antecedent is discovered, the provisional bail will not be confirmed; otherwise, it will be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in view of the alleged offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
- Whether the circumstances of recovery of liquor justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 30
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- liquor seizure
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26544 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2026 Thana- MADHUBAN District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ramesh Mahto son of Kamal Mahto Resident of village - Wajitpur, PS -
Madhuban, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Harsha Shaswat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 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 (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 10 litres of liquor from the house of Harinandan
Rai, 35 litres of liquor from the shop of the petitioner and 6
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 and is not the owner of
the seized vehicle. It is further submitted that in the shop of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26544 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
petitioner, customers visit regularly and no prudent person
would use his own business premises for committing an
occurrence and, thus, would create evidence against himself
and, hence, would get implicated. It is next submitted that it
might be a possibility that some customers, seeing the police,
left the liquor near his shop. It is also submitted that liquor was
not recovered from the shop of the petitioner but from a place
adjacent to his shop and, as such, he came to be implicated
based on the secret information which is the easiest way to
implicate someone without holding a proper investigation of the
case, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean
antecedent.
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 Madhuban P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26544 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
Case No. 61 of 2026, 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
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…