Patna High Court
Lalu Mahto @ Shailendra Mahto @ Shailendra Kumar SahuklaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Lalu Mahto, was arrested on 9 April 2026 in connection with a case involving the seizure of 301.26 litres of foreign liquor and charged under IPC sections 272, 273, 34 and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 sections 41(1)(2), 47 and 30(a). He contended that his name was implicated solely on the basis of a statement by a co‑accused, Vishal Kapoor, and that no material was recovered from his possession. The petitioner also argued that the seizure list was prepared by police officers, violating mandatory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act, 2023. The State opposed bail, highlighting six prior criminal cases against the petitioner, four of which were already on bail. The Court, noting the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and the reliance on co‑accused testimony, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence. The order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent without delaying the acceptance of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the accusation is based solely on a co‑accused's statement and no material is recovered from the petitioner
- Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS Act, 2023, affects the bail decision
- Impact of the petitioner’s prior criminal cases on the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act, 2023 — s. 103, 105
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 — s. 30(a), 41(1)(2), 47
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 34
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- co‑accused testimony
- foreign liquor seizure
- prohibition law
- criminal antecedent
- IPC sections 272, 273, 34
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42846 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2023 Thana- LAKHNAUR District- Madhubani
======================================================
Lalu Mahto @ Shailendra Mahto @ Shailendra Kumar Sahukla Son of
Rajendra Mahto @ Rajendra Prasad Resident of village- Rupauli, Ps-
Lakhnaur, Dist- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Baleshwar Kamat
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ramesh Chandra
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
09.04.2026 in connection with Lakhnaur P.S. Case No. 101 of
2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 34 of
IPC and Sections 41(1)(2), 47, 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of total 301.26 liters of foreign liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It
appears from the FIR that altogether 301.26 liters of foreign
liquor was recovered from the place of occurrence. Learned
counsel for the petitioner next submits that name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42846 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
2/3
petitioner has transpired in the present case on the basis of
disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person, namely,
Vishal Kapoor and except the aforesaid nothing has come during
the investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in
the present occurrence. It is next submitted that from perusal of
the seizure list it appears that the seizure list witnesses are
police personnel so there is non-compliance of mandatory
provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and
petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner has antecedent of six cases other than the
present case but fairly submits out of six cases petitioner is on
bail in four cases and the rest two cases are pending for
consideration before the court of competent law.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that nothing has been recovered from the conscious
possession of the petitioner and name of the petitioner has
transpired in the present case on the basis of disclosure made by
apprehended co-accused person, let the petitioner, above named,
be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42846 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
3/3
satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Excise Act,
Jhanjharpur, District-Madhubani in connection with Lakhnaur
P.S. Case No. 101 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.