Allowed

Mukti Mahto @ Mukti Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 May 2026CR. MISC./30583/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Patna granted anticipatory bail to Mukti Mahto in a case involving alleged sale of country-made liquor under sections 274/275 of BNS and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The court relied on Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar, noting recovery from an open place and no criminal antecedents, and imposed conditions for release.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on anticipatory bail with conditions: bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-, two sureties, appearance before police and trial courts every fortnight, and prohibition from tampering with eviden

Mukti Mahto @ Mukti Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30583 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-270 Year-2025 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Mukti Mahto @ Mukti Kumar S/O Kishori Mahto @ Ramekbal Mahto R/O Village- Raghunathpur, P.S- Chhauradano,Dist- East Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 18-05-2026

¶12

Heard the parties.

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No. 270 of 2025 for the offence under sections 274/275 of BNS and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶14

As per the prosecution story, the Police on secret information of petitioner selling country made liquor, went to the place and there is recovery/ seizure of 27 liter Nepali liquor kept under the sack near the Pipra Bajrang Chowk. This led to the FIR.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they do not have criminal antecedent and the liquor has been recovered from an open place.

¶16

Further, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Patna High Court in the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30583 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026 2/3

¶18

case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089 wherein it has been held that an application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar under Section 76(2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.

¶19

Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the Chowkidar has named him.

¶20

Taking into account the submissions of the parties and the judgment in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra) , as also that recovery/seizure is from an open place and he do not have criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.

¶21

Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 01 in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No. 270 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:

¶22

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30583 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026 3/3

¶24

(ii) the petitioner(s) shall be appearing before the Police Station as and when required for co-operating in the investigation;

¶25

(iii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶26

(iv) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for six months to mark his attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶27

(v) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶28

(vi) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶29

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶30

Vijay Singh/-

¶31

U T

Mukti Mahto @ Mukti Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukti Mahto @ Mukti Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umar Chauhan @ Uma Jamadar Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Kumar Singh @ Ram Kumar Sinha Vs The State of Bihar

Prince Yadav @ Prince Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Anita devi Vs The State of Bihar

Niraj Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Chintu Manjhi @ Sintu Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar