Patna High Court
Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjeet Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Mahto, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after police seized 13.2 litres of Nepali liquor near his residence. The prosecution alleged the liquor was linked to him, but the petitioner claimed no criminal antecedent and no possession, asserting that the allegation did not constitute an offence. The petitioner relied on the Patna High Court Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which held that anticipatory bail can be entertained despite the bar in Section 76(2) if the FIR does not disclose a cognizable offence. The court, after considering the submissions and the precedent, granted anticipatory bail with a set of strict conditions, including surety, regular appearances before police and the trial court, and non‑interference with witnesses. The order is conditional on the petitioner having no undisclosed criminal antecedent; otherwise it becomes null. The bail bond was set at Rs.10,000 with two sureties and a four‑week window for surrender or arrest.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent and absence of possession justify anticipatory bail.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute an offence under sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 41(1), 76(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- section 76(2)
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- pre‑trial liberty
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29561 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2026 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani
======================================================
Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjeet Kumar Mahto S/o- Late Jagdish Mahto R/Vill
-Kamlabari P.s-Pandaul Dist -Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Girish Chandra Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 67 of 2026 for the
offence under sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police raided the
place and near the house of the petitioner, there is
recovery/seizure of 13.2 liters of Nepali liquor. This led to the
FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
neither he has criminal antecedent nor anything has been
recovered from his conscious possession but the locals gave the
name.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29561 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/4
the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in
2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an
application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar
Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar
under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation
made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made
out.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that his
name has cropped up.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that the petitioner do not have any criminal antecedent, in
that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the
privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
8. If, however, it is found that contrary to the
statement made in paragraph-3, the petitioner has criminal
antecedent, the present order shall become infructuous.
9. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29561 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/4
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise
Madhubani in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 67 of
2026 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for six months to mark his
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29561 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
4/4
(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.