Patna High Court
Harindra Mahto @ Harindra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bail bonds, sureties, and verification of his antecedent, under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Harindra Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case alleging offences under Sections 30(a) and 45 of the Excise Act, involving the alleged recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and bushes. The petitioner claimed he had a clean antecedent, was not in possession of the seized motorcycle, and was implicated solely on the confessional statements of co‑accused Jogi Mahto and Nitish Kumar, which the counsel argued lack evidentiary value. The State opposed the anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, directed that the petitioner be released on provisional anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 438(2) CrPC conditions. The order stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in view of the alleged offences under the Excise Act.
- Whether the confessional statements of co‑accused constitute admissible evidence for arrest.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Excise Act — s. 30(a), 45
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Excise Act
- clean antecedent
- confessional statement
- provisional bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42712 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2026 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Harindra Mahto @ Harindra Kumar S/o Jogi Mahto Resident of Village-
Mamrkha Bhaiya Tola, P.S.- Malahi, Dist.- E. Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhannjay Kumar II
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-07-2026 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 45 of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is
of recovery of 60 litres of liquor from a motorcycle and from
bushes.
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 motorcycle and he came to be implicated based on
confessional statement of Jogi Mahto and Nitish Kumar in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42712 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
2/3
police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) 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
Paharpur P. S. Case No.243 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
found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42712 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026
3/3
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, 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.