Patna High Court
Rakesh Chaudhary @ Rakesh MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting provisional bail subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Chaudhary, sought anticipatory bail in a case under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, alleging that liquor was recovered from a shop he does not own and that he was not arrested at the scene. The petitioner argued that he had only one prior case under the Excise Act and that the police mechanically implicated him. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted provisional anticipatory bail on the condition that the petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and that the trial court verify his criminal antecedents. If more than one prior case is found, the bail would be cancelled; if only one, it would be confirmed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022?
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged antecedent of a prior Excise case affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- excise law
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- Section 30(a)
- provisional bail
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9511 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-606 Year-2025 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Rakesh Chaudhary @ Rakesh Mahto Son of Nand Kishore Mahto @ Nand
Kishor Mahto Resident of Village- Mahmadpur Dardha @ Mahamadpur
Dardha @ Mahamadpur Badal PS -Sakra District -Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar
Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 153.75 litres of liquor from shop of
the petitioner. It is next submitted that petitioner was not
arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his
conscious possession. It is asserted and submitted that petitioner
is not the owner of the shop from where the alleged recovery is
made. It is next submitted that police in mechanical manner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9511 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
investigates and implicates once an accused is implicated in a
case relating to excise earlier.
4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
5. 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 Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on
provisional anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bond in the
sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Judge, Excise Court No.-I, Muzaffarpur in connection
with Sakra P.S. Case No.606 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. The application stands allowed.
7. It is made clear that the learned trial Court after
accepting the provisional bail bond of the petitioner shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is
found that petitioner has antecedent of more than one case, then
it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of
obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before
this Court, in that event, the present provisional anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9511 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found
that petitioner has antecedent of only one case, in that event, the
provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.