Patna High Court
Mohan PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted conditionally, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohan Pandey, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 274, 275 and 3(5) of the IPC and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that the alleged liquor seizure was made from a location and vehicle not owned by him and that the complaint was motivated by a personal dispute with a chaukidar. He argued that no liquor was found in his conscious possession at the time of arrest and that the police had mechanically implicated him without proper investigation. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offences were serious and that the petitioner had a prior excise case. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties, and conditioned the confirmation of bail on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The order also stipulated that if more than one antecedent case is found, the bail would not be confirmed, whereas a single antecedent would lead to immediate confirmation.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the alleged offences under the IPC and Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the alleged lack of conscious possession and ownership of the seized vehicle justify granting anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (Suppression) Act — s. 482(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022 — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 274, 275, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- excise offences
- liquor seizure
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32116 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2025 Thana- HARLAKHI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Mohan Pandey Son of Brijkashor Pandey @ Brajesh Pandey @ Bijkishor
Pandey Resident of Village- Sothgaon, Ward No. 07, P.S.- Harlakhi, Dist.-
Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 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 Sections 274, 275
and 3(5) of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 315 litres of liquor from seven sacks
near Kamtaul Manokama Temple and 18.75 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. It is further submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32116 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and even
the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to
the petitioner and he came to be implicated at the instance of the
Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next
submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to
excise the police start implicating mechanically either at the
instance of the Chawkidar, local person, confessional statement
or secret information without holding a proper investigation of
the case.
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.5,000/- (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 Harlakhi P.S. Case
No. 372 of 2025 arising out of G.R. Case No. 05 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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32116 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
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 more than 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 has antecedent of only one case in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.