Patna High Court
Mukesh Mahto @ Mukesh Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Mukesh Mahto applied for anticipatory bail after a case was registered against him under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for alleged recovery of 32,400 litres of liquor from his joint family house. He argued that he was not arrested at the scene, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and that the concept of deemed possession had been abolished by the 2018 amendment, making the charge untenable. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, considering these submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and a verification of his criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if more than three prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
- Whether the doctrine of deemed possession applies post‑2018 amendment of the Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s antecedent of three prior cases affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- deemed possession
- joint family property
- criminal antecedent
- Section 30
- Section 482
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70979 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Mukesh Mahto @ Mukesh Kumar Mahto S/o Sonelal Mahto R/o Vill-
Milkichak, P.S.- Bahadurpur, Distt- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 07-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedents of three cases as would manifest from
supplementary affidavit and allegation is of recovery of 32.400
litres of liquor from house of the 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70979 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year
2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender
has been done away with and the petitioner came to be
implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way
to implicate someone without holding a proper investigation.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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-bond in the
sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Exclusive Special Judge-Ist (Excise Act), Darbhanga in
connection with Excise P.S. Sadar Case No.222 of 2025, subject
to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. 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 more than three cases,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70979 of 2025(3) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
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 antecedents of only three cases, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…