Patna High Court
Rakesh Mahto @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, Rakesh Mahto and Arjun Mahto, were implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 102 litres of liquor from banana orchards, including their own. They applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that they were not arrested, the liquor was not in their conscious possession, the orchard is a public place, and the informant’s identity was omitted from the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, directing the trial court to verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if the petitioners were found to have more prior cases than disclosed, the bail could be revoked. The court thus allowed anticipatory bail conditionally, pending verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the lack of arrest, absence of liquor in conscious possession, and omission of the informant’s name from the FIR justify anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- BNSS
- Section 482(2)
- criminal antecedent
- police investigation
- banana orchard
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29701 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2026 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Rakesh Mahto @ Rakesh Kumar S/o Kishundeo Mahto @ Kishundev Mahto
Resident of Village- Dhekahan, Bala Tola, Police Station- Piprakothi,
District- East Champaran
2. Arjun Mahto @ Arjun Kumar S/o Ram Prasad Mahto Resident of Village-
Dhekahan, Bala Tola, Police Station- Piprakothi, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar =
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Karandeep Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases under the Excise
Act and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case and
allegation is of recovery of 102 litres of liquor from two
different banana orchards including the orchard of petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29701 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession and banana orchard
is a place which is accessible to villagers at large. It is next
submitted that no prudent person would use his own orchard for
committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence
against himself and hence would get implicated and they came
to be implicated at the instance of local people, but then the
name of the person, who disclosed the name of the petitioners,
is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case
of the prosecution, when petitioners have not been implicated
based on secret information. It is further submitted that once an
accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar, local
person, confessional statement or secret information without
holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29701 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
court in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 20 of 2026
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court
shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in the
event if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of more
than two cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of more than
one case then it would be presumed that petitioners, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed their
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory
bail order shall not be confirmed with respect to that petitioner
who had concealed his criminal antecedent before this Court, but
after verification if it is found that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent
of two cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of one case in
that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.