Patna High Court
Bablu Mahto @ Bablu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to strict conditions, finding insufficient material to justify their arrest.
Summary
Petitioners Bablu Mahto and Satrudhan Jaiswal were implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 98.25 litres of foreign liquor and Rs. 25,000. They contended that no liquor was recovered from their conscious possession and that their names were mentioned only on the basis of a co‑accused’s disclosure, with no other material linking them to the offence. The State opposed anticipatory bail, invoking Section 76(2) of the same Act and arguing that pre‑arrest bail was not permissible. The High Court, relying on the precedent of Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, held that the lack of direct evidence warranted the grant of anticipatory bail, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The court ordered the petitioners to surrender within thirty days, post a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, and comply with several conduct conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 438 CrPC/Section 482 B.N.S. Sanhita despite the prohibition of pre‑arrest bail under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioners' involvement is established given that no liquor was recovered from their possession and their names arose solely from a co‑accused’s statement.
- Whether the recovery procedure complied with mandatory requirements of Sections 103 and 105 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 103, 105, 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- false implication
- recovery procedure
- co‑accused disclosure
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27232 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-463 Year-2025 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Bablu Mahto @ Bablu Kumar S/o Hari Shankar Prasad Resident of village -
Amwa, P.S. - Kotwa, Distt.- East Champaran
2. Satrudhan Jaiswal @ Satrudhan Prasad S/o Punit Prasad Resident of village
- Amwa, P.S. - Kotwa, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Kotwa P.S. Case No. 463 of 2025, F.I.R dated
28.12.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section
30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 98.25 liters of foreign liquor and
Rs. 25,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27232 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/4
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He
further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that nothing has
been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners
rather the recovery has been made from the possession of
apprehended co-accused, namely, Akash Kumar and their name
transpired on the basis of disclosure made by the said Akash
Kumar and except the disclosure made by apprehended co-
accused person, no other cogent material has come during
investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioners in
the present occurrence. There is non-compliance with
mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section
Section 103 and 105 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. No
case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner
under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioners referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-
arrest bail would not be maintainable. She further submits that
petitioner no.1 has one criminal antecedent in which he is on
bail and petitioner no.2 has clean antecedent.
6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27232 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/4
Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar
reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on
behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant
of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
counsel for the petitioners.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been
recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners and their
name transpired on the basis of disclosure made by apprehended
co-accused person, let the petitioners, above named, in the event
of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Excise Court No.1,
Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Kotwa P.S. Case
No. 463 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section
482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other
following conditions:-
i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall
be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27232 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
4/4
court and shall remain physically present as directed by the
court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without
sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court
below.
ii. If the petitioners tamper 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 petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. 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…