Patna High Court
Mithun Mahto @ Mithun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail was granted subject to bond, sureties, and verification of antecedent, with confirmation contingent on the antecedent findings.
Summary
Mithun Mahto petitioned the Patna High Court for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 35 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He contended that he was not in possession of the liquor, was not the owner of the vehicle, and was implicated by a watchman with whom he has a hostile relationship. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.5,000 bond, two sureties, and a six‑week surrender to the trial court, directing verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one antecedent, the provisional bail will be confirmed. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Section 30
- Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of liquor
- watchman testimony
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31354 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2026 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Mithun Mahto @ Mithun Kumar S/o- Bindeshwari Mahto Resident of Village
- Ramnagar Bairiya, P.S. - Nautan, District - West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adarsh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-06-2026 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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act, as
would manifest from the supplementary affidavit and allegation
is of recovery of 35 liters of liquor from a motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the seized vehicle and came to be implicated at the
instance of Chowkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31354 of 2026(3) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
is also submitted that if Chowkidar was aware of the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did
not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR
which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
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 for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Trial Court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
Provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) 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 Malahi
P.S. Case No. 47 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than one case then it would be presumed that petitioner, for the
purposes of seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his
antecedent before this Court, as such, the provisional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31354 of 2026(3) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed, but after
verification if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of one
case only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.