Patna High Court
Mastana Bhuiya @ MastanaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Mastana Bhuiya sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act after police seized 30 litres of Mahua from an abandoned bag during a raid. The prosecution alleged the seizure was based on secret information and that locals implicated the petitioner. The petitioner argued he had no criminal antecedent and relied on the Full Bench decision in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, which permits anticipatory bail despite the bar in Section 76(2) if no offence is made out. The court, considering the facts and the precedent, granted anticipatory bail with a set of conditions, reserving the right to cancel the order if a criminal antecedent is later discovered. The bail order required a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, regular appearances before police and the trial court, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or committing further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act despite the bar under Section 76(2).
- Whether the petitioner is likely to be held liable for an offence under Section 30(a) based on the seizure of Mahua.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the investigation and trial.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- Section 76(2)
- seizure of Mahua
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8454 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-435 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Mastana Bhuiya @ Mastana S/o- Ram Kusun Bhuiya @ Ramkishun Bhuyian
@ Jhakhru Bhuiya Resident of village- Wahid Bigha P.S- Muffasil Dist-
Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramendra Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 435 of 2025 for the
offence under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act.
3. As per the prosecution story, the Police on secret
information, raided the place and from the abandoned bag, there
is recovery/seizure of 30 liter Mahua. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
admittedly, recovery/seizure is from an abandoned bag, only
because the locals gave his name, got implicated. The last
submission is that he do not have criminal antecedent.
5. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8454 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/4
the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in
the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in
2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an
application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar
Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar
under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation
made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made
out.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the
locals gave his name.
7. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra), as
also that recovery/seizure is from an open place/bag, he do not
have criminal antecedent, as submitted, in that background, this
Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail
with conditions.
8. However, if it is found that contrary to the statement
made in paragraph 3, the petitioner has criminal antecedent, the
present order shall become infructuous.
9. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8454 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/4
satisfaction of learned Court of District and Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Court No.-1,
Aurangabad (Bihar) in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.
435 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall be appearing before the
Police Station as and when required for co-operating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight for six months to mark his
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8454 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
4/4
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…