Patna High Court
Pattu Ram @ Mantu RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court conditionally granted provisional anticipatory bail, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of the petitioner’s antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Pattu Ram, sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case under Sections 30(a) and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for allegedly recovering 69.12 litres of liquor from a motorcycle. He argued that he was not arrested at the spot, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and he was not the owner of the vehicle, claiming that the chowkidar’s allegation was unsubstantiated. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offences were serious. The Court, considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and appear before the trial court within six weeks. The order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, stating that if more than two prior cases are found, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of conscious possession and non‑ownership of the seized vehicle justify bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic and Substance (BNSS) Act — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of liquor
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90748 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2025 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Pattu Ram @ Mantu Ram S/o Ramprasad Ram R/o Village - Bagahawa, Ward
No. 1, P.S - Dhanha, District - West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gyan Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Meena Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 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 Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 69.12 litres of liquor from a
motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession. It is further submitted
that petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and came to
be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar but then it is
submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90748 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform
the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts
an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted
that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise the
police start implicating mechanically either at the instance of the
Chawkidar, local person, secret information or confessional
statement without holding a proper investigation of the case.
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, let 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.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Dhanha
P.S. Case No. 209 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482 of the BNSS.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial
court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if
it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than two cases,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90748 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his
antecedent before this Court at para 3 of the anticipatory bail
application in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order
shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that
petitioner has antecedent of only two cases in that event the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…