Patna High Court
Munni MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond and verification of antecedents, with the possibility of withdrawal if antecedents are misrepresented.
Summary
The petitioners, Munni Mahto and Muneshwar Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 for alleged recovery of 10.20 litres of liquor from an egg shop. They contended that the liquor was not found in their possession, the FIR did not disclose the informant’s name, and the police investigation was mechanical, asserting that petitioner‑1 has a clean antecedent while petitioner‑2 has three prior cases. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on furnishing a bail bond of Rs 15,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioners’ criminal antecedents. It further held that if verification shows any discrepancy in the stated antecedents, the bail may be withdrawn. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
- Whether the absence of the informant’s name in the FIR and lack of possession of the alleged liquor affect the grant of bail
- Whether the petitioners’ criminal antecedents justify the imposition of conditions on anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30
- criminal antecedent
- FIR
- police investigation
- Section 482
- B.N.S.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36883 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2026 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Munni Mahto Son of Kapildev Mahto Resident of Village- Chainpur Dhaka,
P.S.- Dhaka, District- East Champaran, State- Bihar.
2. Muneshwar Mahto Son of Kapildev Mahto Resident of Village- Chainpur
Dhaka, P.S.- Dhaka, District- East Champaran, State- Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aman Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner
no.2 has antecedent of three cases and allegation is of recovery
of 10.20 litres of liquor from an egg shop. It is next submitted
that petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36883 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
petitioners and they came to be implicated at the instance of
local person but then the name of the person who disclosed the
name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that
police in mechanical manner investigates and implicates.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. 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.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand)
each 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 Dhaka P.S. Case No.133 of 2026,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court
thereafter shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners
and in the event if it is found that petitioner no.1 has antecedent
even one case and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of more than
three cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36883 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
had concealed their antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed with
respect to those petitioners whose criminal antecedent does not
tally but if after verification the criminal antecedent as recorded
hereinabove tallies with the petitioners in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.