Pradeep Mahto @ Pradeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14903 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-437 Year-2024 Thana- RAJNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Pradeep Mahto @ Pradeep Kumar Jangali Mahto Resident of Village- Ram Patti, P.S.- Rajnagar, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025

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

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275, 3(5) of B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the allegation is of recovery of 5.7 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner.

4. 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 after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and the house in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14903 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/3 question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Ram Dular Yadav in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police starts implicating mechanically.

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

6. 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. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sesssions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge Excise Act, Madhubani in connection with Rajnagar P. S. Case No.437 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14903 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 3/3

8. 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 three cases, 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 only three cases, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T