Patna High Court
Praduman Mahto @ Praduman Bind @ Praduman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the petitioner’s multiple prior convictions and the nature of the alleged offence outweighed the grounds for granting bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Praduman Mahto, sought anticipatory bail under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in a case (PS No. 490 of 2025) for alleged contravention of Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act involving the recovery of 100 litres of liquor. The prosecution’s case is based on the recovery of liquor from a rickshaw and thethel, with the petitioner’s name disclosed by a co‑accused. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no involvement in the liquor seizure, and that the prima facie case against him was weak. The State opposed bail, highlighting that the petitioner has four prior criminal convictions of a similar nature. The Court, considering the antecedents and the nature of the offence, refused to grant anticipatory bail, but directed that regular bail could be considered if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 should be granted to a person with multiple prior convictions for similar offences.
- Whether the disclosure of the petitioner’s name by a co‑accused suffices to establish a prima facie case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail
- criminal antecedents
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 30
- Section 103
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89553 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-490 Year-2025 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran
======================================================
Praduman Mahto @ Praduman Bind @ Praduman Kumar S/O Jageshwar
Mahto @ Jugeshwar @ Tengar Mahto Resident of Ward No 28 Sonarpatti,
Sahebganj, purvi Dahiyawan, P.S.- Town, Dist.- Saran, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhijeet Abhigyan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Town PS Case No. 490 of 2025 instituted for the offences
under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that total 100
litres of liquor was recovered from Rickshaw and Thela.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of
disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person. The
petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of
liquor. The petitioner has four criminal antecedents. There is no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89553 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/2
compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore,
contends that prima-facie no case is made out against the
petitioner.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that
petitioner bears four criminal antecedent/s, that too of the
similar nature, hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and specifically taking into account the fact that
petitioner bears four criminal antecedent/s, that too of the
similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory
bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner is hereby rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the
court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays
for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court
below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the
order of this Court.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.