Patna High Court

Shambhu SahaniversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court held that anticipatory bail is warranted and granted, subject to bond and surety conditions, as the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case and did not comply with Section 100 CrPC.

Summary

The petitioner, Suman Kumar Mahato, was implicated in a case (Sahebganj P.S. No. 97 of 2024) alleging illegal possession of 3,615 litres of liquor recovered from six vehicles, under IPC sections 272, 273, 34 and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The prosecution’s case relied solely on the confessional statements of co‑accused Aniket Kumar and Roushan Kumar, with no material found in the petitioner’s possession and no compliance of Section 100 CrPC. The petitioner, having no criminal antecedent, applied for anticipatory bail, arguing innocence and lack of evidentiary basis. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the absence of direct evidence and procedural lapses, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC, directing surrender within six weeks if arrested.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 438 CrPC in the absence of direct incriminating material against the petitioner.
Whether the prosecution has complied with the procedural requirement of Section 100 CrPC for arrest.
Whether confessional statements of co‑accused can alone justify denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 100, 438(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34

Subjects

anticipatory bail
IPC 272
IPC 273
IPC 34
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Section 438 CrPC
Section 100 CrPC
liquor seizure
confessional statement

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.325 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Suman Kumar @ Suman Kumar Mahato S/O- Jwahar Mahato @ Jawahar
                 Mahto Village- Jasauli @ Jasoli Ojha Tola Ps- Kathaiya Dist- Muzaffarpur

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Rana Randhir Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-01-2025                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

                   Sahebganj P.S. case No. 97 of 2024 registered under Section

                   272, 273, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                               3. The prosecution allegation, in short, is that 3615

                   liters liquor was recovered from six different vehicles.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. No

                   incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious

                   possession of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.325 of 2025(2) dt.17-01-2025
                                                        2/2




                     transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused

                     Aniket Kumar and Roushan Kumar. The petitioner is neither the

                     owner nor the driver of any of the six vehicles in question. The

                     petitioner has got no knowledge and concern with the alleged

                     recovery of liquor.         There is no compliance of Section 100 of

                     Cr.P.C.

                                 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                     let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender

                     before the learned court below within a period of six weeks

                     from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail

                     bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the

                     like    amount       each     to    the     satisfaction   of   the   Court

                     below/concerned Court in connection with Sahebganj P.S. case

                     No. 97 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                     Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Pankaj/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…