Allowed¶18

Suraj Mahto @ Suraj Kumar Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Jun 2026CR. MISC./38860/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.38860 of 2026, Suraj Mahto @ Suraj Kumar Mahto v. The State of Bihar, decided 22-06-2026 by Rajesh Kumar Verma, J.; regular bail under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022; Panapur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026, District Saran at Chapra; recovery of 20 liters country made liquor; parity with co-accused granted bail; antecedents (eight other cases, on bail in five); bail bond Rs.10,000/- with two sureties; conditions on attendance, tampering and antecedent verification.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 2nd Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra, subject to conditions of trial attendance, non-tampering and verification of criminal antecedents.

Suraj Mahto @ Suraj Kumar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 24.04.2026 in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026 under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, should be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Court's answer

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 2nd Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Bail conditioned on co-operation in the trial and proper representation/physical presence on dates fixed; bail bond to be cancelled on absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason.

¶20

Key takeaways

If the petitioner tampers with evidence or witnesses, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.ratio¶21
Court below to verify the petitioner's criminal antecedents; if concealment of antecedents is found at any stage, steps for cancellation of the bail bond are to follow, but acceptance of bail bonds shall not be delayed for verification.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022, S. 30(a) — Panapur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 14.03.2026 — recovery of 20 liters of country made liquor — petitioner in custody since 24.04.2026 — co-accused Babita Devi @ Shanti Devi & Anr. already granted bail by a Coordinate Bench (order dated 17.04.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.25633 of 2026) — petitioner reported on bail in five of eight other cases — bail granted on bond of Rs.10,000/- with two like sureties to the satisfaction of the 2nd Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra, with conditions as to trial attendance, non-tampering with evidence/witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedents (acceptance of bail bonds not to be delayed for verification).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38860 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2026 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

Suraj Mahto @ Suraj Kumar Mahto S/o Muni Mahto @ Munni Mahto Resident of vill- Methaura, P.O.- Dubauli, P.S.- Panapur, Distt.- Saran at Chapra

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 22-06-2026 Heard Mr.Jeetendra Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad, learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 24.04.2026 in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 14.03.2026 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.

¶13

Recovery is of 20 liters of country made liquor.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears altogether 20 liters of country made liquor was recovered from behind the house of the petitioner and petitioner and his family members

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38860 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026 2/3

¶16

have been made accused in the present case and petitioners have been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion and except the suspicion, nothing has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and co-accused person, namely, Babita Devi @ Shanti Devi & Anr. have been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 17.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.25633 of 2026 and the petitioner is in custody since 24.04.2026.

¶17

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries eight more cases other than the present one but he fairly submits that out of eight cases, the petitioner is on bail in five cases, and rest three cases are pending for consideration before the competent court of law, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

¶18

Considering the aforesaid fact, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2^nd Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2026, with the following conditions:-

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38860 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026 3/3

¶20

(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶21

(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶22

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶23

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶24

Nitesh/-

¶25

U T

Suraj Mahto @ Suraj Kumar Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Mahto @ Suraj Kumar 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

Mansur Ansari @ Md. Mansur Ansari Vs The State of Bihar

Mohit Raj @ Romi @ Romio Vs The State of Bihar

Kanhaiya Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Jatashankar Prasad @ Jatashankar Kushwaha Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rupesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar