Patna High Court
Ashok MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions and verification of antecedent.
Summary
The petitioners, Ashok Mahto and Mukesh Paswan, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018 for alleged possession of liquor recovered from a joint family house. They argued they have clean antecedents, the liquor was not in their conscious possession, and the case relied on a confessional statement of another accused, which they claimed lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail. The Court considered these submissions and granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.500 with two sureties and a six‑week window for surrender, pending verification of any criminal antecedent. The order also stipulated that if any antecedent is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed immediately. The decision rests on the principles of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the need to balance the petitioners' rights with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
- Whether the confessional statement of an accused in police custody can form the basis for arrest.
- Whether the joint family ownership of the house negates the allegation of possession by the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- liquor prohibition
- joint family property
- confessional statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 30(a)
- Bihar Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.466 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE ROSERA District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Ashok Mahto S/O Shiv Narayan Mahto R/o Village- Karai Dih, Pul Chowk
Ward No 07, PS- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur
2. Mukesh Paswan S/O Gugeshwar Paswan R/o Village- Karai Dih, Pul Chowk
Ward No 07, PS- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rani Shashi Bharti, Advocate
Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of
recovery of 55 litres of liquor from the house of eight accused
persons out of which 1.500 litres of liquor is alleged to have
been recovered from the house of petitioner no. 1 and 9.500
litres of liquor from the house of petitioner no. 2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners were not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.466 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
recovered from their conscious possession. It is further
submitted that the house in question is a joint family property, as
such, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it were the
petitioners who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor
kept in the house was within their knowledge. It is next
submitted that petitioners came to be implicated based on the
confessional statement of apprehended accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of
law.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, in
the event of their 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.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) each 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
Rosera Excise P.S. Case No. 181 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.466 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and
if it is found that petitioners have antecedent of even one case, it
would be presumed that petitioners had concealed their
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…