Patna High Court
Ram Kumar Mahto @ Ram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to bail bonds, sureties and verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Kumar Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with offences under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act, alleging that liquor was seized from a truck not owned by him and that his name was omitted from the FIR. The petitioner argued that he was not in possession of the seized liquor and that the investigation was mechanically conducted based on information from a local person. The State opposed the bail, citing the petitioner’s antecedent of three prior Excise cases. The Court considered the submissions, the nature of the alleged offences, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC. The order was made conditional: if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; if only three are found, the bail would be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the petitioner has prior cases under the Excise Act.
- Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and lack of possession of the seized liquor affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged non‑ownership of the seized vehicle is a ground to deny anticipatory bail.
- What conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC must be imposed in granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 32(3)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of liquor
- FIR omission
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40373 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2026 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Begusarai
======================================================
Ram Kumar Mahto @ Ram Kumar S/o Mahendra Mahto R/o vill-Barkurba
P.S- Cheriya Bariyarpur District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Suman Kumari Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act
and allegation is of recovery of 982.440 litres of liquor from a
mini Tata truck.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of
the seized truck and he came to be implicated at the instance of
local person, but the name of the person, who disclosed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40373 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the F.I.R., which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted
that police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons in
cases relating to excise either at the behest of Chaukidar, local
person, secret information and confessional statement in a
mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the
sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen 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 Begusarai Excise P. S. Case No.86 of 2026, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40373 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than three cases,
then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of three cases only, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.