Patna High Court

Anil MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions and verification of his antecedent.

Summary

The petitioner, Anil Mahto, was implicated in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 270 litres of liquor from two motorcycles, one of which he owned. He argued that he had no prior criminal record, was not in possession of the liquor at the time of arrest, and was unaware of his friend's alleged misuse of the vehicle. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to a modest bail bond, two sureties, and verification of the petitioner's antecedent by the trial court. The order stipulated that if any prior case is discovered, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed upon verification of a clean record. The decision was based on the provisions of Section 482(2) of the BNSS and the principles governing anticipatory bail.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act and Section 482(2) of the BNSS
Whether the petitioner's clean antecedent and lack of possession of the seized liquor justify granting anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
excise law
Section 30
Section 482
clean antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85611 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Anil Mahto Son of Chandeshwar Mahto R/o Village- Pipra Parsain, Ward No.
                 03 Hanuman Nagar, P.S.- Sonbarsa, District- Sitamarhi

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Birendra Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   22-01-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the

                   Bihar Excise Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of

                   recovery of 270 litres of liquor from two motorcycles.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

                   recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be

                   implicated based on the fact that he is owner of one of the

                   seized motorcycles. It is next submitted that no prudent person

                   would use his own vehicle for committing an occurrence and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85611 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
                                            2/3




          thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get

          implicated, it is further submitted that petitioner was completely

          unaware that his friend would misuse the vehicle in the manner

          as alleged.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                   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 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) 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 Sonbarsa

          P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid

          down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                   7.     It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial Court

          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

          seeking anticipatory bail, had concealed his antecedent before this

          Court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be

          confirmed, but after verification if it is found that petitioner is a
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85611 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional

                        anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…