Sanjay Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 15-02-2025

¶11

Heard Mr. Krishna Prabhat, learned counsel

¶12

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Pushpa Sinha, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 1933 of 2024 registered under Section(s) 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act 2022 (Amended).

¶14

As per the allegation made in the FIR, total 218.88 liters of illicit liquor was recovered from petitioner’s house.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner has no concern with the alleged seized liquor. The alleged recovery of illicit liquor was made from the house of the petitioner, when no one

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.966 of 2025(2) dt.15-02-2025 2/3

¶17

was present in the house and it was locked and the liquor was lying in open space. Petitioner is not involved either in manufacturing or in trade of illicit liquor, which is prohibited in the State of Bihar. On these grounds, petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶18

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶19

Considering the nature of allegation made in the FIR against the petitioner, as well as, the fact that the State has totally failed to check the smuggling, manufacturing and selling of illicit liquor in the State of Bihar and the recovery was made from an open place, I am of the opinion that petitioner has, prima facie , made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶20

The petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge Excise Court No.02, Muzaffarpur in connection with Muzaffarpur Excise P.S. Case No. 1933 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.966 of 2025(2) dt.15-02-2025 3/3

¶22

8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.

¶23

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶24

Ashishsingh/-

¶25

U T

Sanjay Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Shukla @ Rajesh Kumar Shukla @ Prashan Kumar Shukla Vs The State of Bihar

Bhavesh Kumar Yadav @ Pappu @ Bhawesh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Naim @ Naeem Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Kumar Thakur @ Mukesh Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Kumar Chaupal Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjan Yadav @ Ranjan Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar