Patna High Court
Ravi Kishan @ Ravi Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional anticipatory bail is granted subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravi Kishan, sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for alleged recovery of 31.7 litres of liquor from a bush adjacent to his house. He argued that he was not arrested on the spot, no liquor was found in his possession, and the informant’s name was omitted from the FIR, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and conditioned on verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. If more than one prior case is found, the bail will not be confirmed; if only one prior case is found, the bail will be confirmed. The order directs the trial court to verify the antecedent within six weeks.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act?
- Whether the absence of seizure from the petitioner’s possession and omission of the informant’s name affect the bail decision?
- What conditions may be imposed on anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- CrPC Section 482
- criminal antecedent
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37386 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ravi Kishan @ Ravi Kumar Mahto S/o Sanjeet Mahto (Inadvertently
mentioned as Sanjeev Mahto on Impugned Order) Resident of - Ward no. 37,
Korbaddha, Lagunia Suraj Kanth, Lagunia Surya Kanth, P.S. Muffasil,
District - Samastipur, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Keshav Bhardwaj
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Veena Kumari Jaiswal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 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 the
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 31.7 litres of liquor from a bush
behind the house of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged
recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37386 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
but then is adjacent to his house and he came to be implicated at
the instance of local people, 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.
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.
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
Samastipur Sadar Excise P.S. Case No. 101 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.37386 of 2026(2) 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 in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be
confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.