Patna High Court
Bhim MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhim Mahto Satrudhan Mahto, was arrested on 14 April 2026 for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, accused of selling illicit liquor and having 100 litres seized from his alleged conscious possession. He contended that the liquor was recovered from the surrounding area, not from his possession, and that the seizure list violated mandatory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of the Bihar Narcotic and Substance Substitution Act, 2023. The State opposed bail, citing three prior cases, though the petitioner was already on bail in those matters. The High Court considered the facts, the alleged procedural lapses, and the petitioner’s antecedents, and ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents. The bail order was conditioned on immediate compliance without delay for verification.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the Bihar Narcotic and Substance Substitution Act, 2023, warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal cases affect the grant of bail in the present matter.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Substance Substitution Act, 2023 — s. 103, 105
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- bail
- illicit liquor
- prohibition act
- seizure
- police procedure
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- BNSS 2023
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32845 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2026 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran
======================================================
Bhim Mahto Satrudhan Mahto @ Satrudhan Mahto R/O village - Sahebganj
Adda no - 2 P. S - Town, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 Heard Mr. Hemant Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
14.04.2026 in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 216 of
2026 for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the
police received a secret information that petitioner along with
other person is selling illicit liquor in Sahebgang, Sonarpatti.
Acting upon that information police reached on the spot. In the
meantime, two persons were started to flee away from there
upon seeing the police party. After chase, they were
apprehended on the spot. Upon searching the said place. Police
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32845 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
recovered 100 liters country made liquor from the conscious
possession of petitioner which was duly seized.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from perusal of the FIR and seizure list it appears that nothing
has been recovered from the conscious possession of the
petitioner rather the recovery has been made from Diyara Area.
It is next submitted that petitioner has no concern at all with the
present occurrence and petitioner has been made an accused in
the present case on the basis of suspicion. It is next submitted
that from perusal of the seizure list it appears that the seizure list
witnesses are police personnel so there is non-compliance of
mandatory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023
and petitioner is in custody since 14.04.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases other than
the present case but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in
the pending matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32845 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
2nd Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Saran at Chapra in
connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 216 of 2026, subject to
the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.