Pankaj Mahto @ Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8005 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-460 Year-2024 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== Pankaj Mahto @ Pankaj Kumar S/O Ramo Mahto @ Ramu Mahto R/O VillPiyarpurva, P.S.- Madhaura, Dist.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
4. Allegation is of recovery of 40 litres of liquor from village Piparpurwa bridge.
5. 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 the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible to public at large and he came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar. It is further submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8005 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/3 police mechanically implicate either at the instance of the Chawkidar, confessional statement, secret information or disclosure made by the local people without holding proper investigation. It is next submitted that if Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Marhowrah P.S. Case No. 460 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. It is made clear that thereafter the learned trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case in that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8005 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 3/3 event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if it is found on verification that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T