Allowed¶21

Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Apr 2026CR. MISC./23525/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23525 of 2026, decided 09-04-2026 by Satyavrat Verma, J. Anticipatory bail granted provisionally to Mithu Sahni @ Mithu Kumar in Mahindwara PS Case No.31 of 2026 (Sitamarhi) under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act; bail-bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.; confirmation conditional on trial-court verification that the petitioner has only two Excise Act antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Provisional anticipatory bail: release upon arrest or surrender within six weeks on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions; confirmation subject to trial-court verification of antecedents (not to be confirmed if more than two cases found; to be confirmed forthwith if two cases only).

Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in Mahindwara PS Case No.31 of 2026 registered under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act, wherein recovery of 501 litres of liquor is alleged from a straw house of Krishna Mohan and the petitioner claims to have been implicated on a custodial confessional statement. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

In the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks, the petitioner is directed to 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, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial Court, after accepting the provisional bail bonds of the petitioner, shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

¶22

Key takeaways

If verification reveals antecedents of more than two cases, it shall be presumed that the petitioner concealed his antecedents for the purpose of obtaining anticipatory bail, and the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed.ratio¶24
If verification shows that the petitioner has antecedents of two cases only, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — S. 30(a) Excise Act — Mahindwara PS Case No.31 of 2026 (Sitamarhi) — alleged recovery of 501 litres of liquor from straw house of Krishna Mohan; petitioner not arrested from spot and, per counsel, implicated on a custodial confessional statement of co-accused — provisional anticipatory bail granted on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount, subject to S.438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions — trial court to verify antecedents; if more than two cases found, concealment to be presumed and order not confirmed; if two cases only, order confirmed forthwith.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23525 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2026 Thana- MAHINDWARA District- Sitamarhi

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumar son of Suresh Sahni @ Naresh Sahni Resident of Village- Koahi PS- Mahindwara District - Sitamarhi

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 09-04-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 501 litres of liquor from a straw house of Krishna Mohan.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioner and petitioner has no concern or relation with Krishna Mohan

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23525 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026 2/3

¶18

and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Krishna Mohan in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is further submitted that after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application.

¶20

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-bonds in the sum 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 Mahindwara P. S. Case No.31 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶21

The application stands allowed.

¶22

It is made clear that the learned trial Court after accepting the provisional bail bonds 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 two cases,

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23525 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026 3/3

¶24

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 order shall not be confirmed, but if on verification, it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two cases only, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

¶25

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶26

vikash/-

¶27

U T

Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithu Sahni @ Mithu kumar 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

Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Balraj Singh @ Bhuntun Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Yadav @ Pramod Jadhav Vs The State of Bihar

Bimla Devi Vs the State of Bihar and Another

Sonu Mallik @ Sonu Malik Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Yadav Vs The State of Bihar