Patna High Court
Ajay Mahto @ Ajay DhangadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail subject to bond, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Mahto, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for alleged possession of 20 litres of liquor recovered from a joint family house. He argued that the liquor was not in his conscious possession, the house being jointly owned, and that the case against him relied solely on a confessional statement of an unrelated person, Ashok, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. 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 forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case of alleged possession of liquor under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act when the alleged possession is not proven and the prosecution relies on a confessional statement of an unrelated accused.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- possession
- excise law
- confessional statement
- joint family property
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40012 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2026 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Ajay Mahto @ Ajay Dhangad S/o Late Mahendra Dhangad R/o Vill-
Dhokrahan Dhangad Toli, ward no. 5, PS- Majhuliya, Distt- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyan Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from house of
petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested
from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious
possession and the house in question is a joint family property
as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner,
who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the
house was within his knowledge and after amendment in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40012 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/3
Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession
and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to
be implicated based on confessional statement of Ashok in
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is
also submitted that petitioner is not related to Ashok in any
manner.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, 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.5000/- (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 Majhauliya P.S. Case No.175/2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the
event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
one case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40012 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
3/3
concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if
on verification 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)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.