Patna High Court
Mahanth Chaudhary @ Mahanth ChaudhuryversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Mahanth Chaudhary sought anticipatory bail after learning of a case registered under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act for the alleged recovery of 711 litres of liquor from a Bolero vehicle. He argued that he was not caught in possession, was not the owner of the vehicle, and that the FIR omitted the informant’s name, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.45,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedent. If the trial court finds more than nine prior cases, the bail will not be confirmed; if only nine cases are found, the provisional bail will be confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in an excise case where the accused was not apprehended in possession and the FIR lacks the informant’s identity.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise offence
- seizure of liquor
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Excise Act
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88138 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-589 Year-2025 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Mahanth Chaudhary @ Mahanth Chaudhury S/o Late Badari Chaudhary @
Late Badari Yadav R/o Village- Bankatiya Tola Tar, P.S- Kateya, Dist-
Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 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 Sections 30(a) and
41(1) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of nine cases out of which seven cases
are under the excise act and allegation is of recovery of 711
liters of liquor from a Bolero vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing
was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the
owner of the seized vehicle. It is further submitted that he came
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88138 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
to be implicated at the instance of local person, but then the
name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is
not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of
the prosecution. It is also submitted that once an accused is
implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts
implicating mechanically either at the instance of Chowkidar,
local person, confessional statement or secret information
without holding a proper investigation.
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.
45,000/- (Rupees Forty Five Thousand) 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
Kateya P.S. Case No. 589 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88138 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more
than nine cases 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 has antecedent of nine
cases only, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…