Pintu Mahto @ Pintu Prasad @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36926 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-550 Year-2021 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Nawada ====================================================== Pintu Mahto @ Pintu Prasad @ Pintu Kumar Son of Surendra Mahto Resident of Village- Manma, P.S.- Hisua, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Deepak Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-06-2026
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 Sections 30(a), 56(B) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 1425.6 litres of liquor from a truck. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle and he came to be implicated based on the official complaint filed by the official. It is further submitted that petitioner was even not aware that a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36926 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026 2/3 complaint case has been filed implicating him in the present case. It is further submitted that cognizance was taken on 20.11.2025, thereafter summons were issued as such petitioner apprehends arrest as in cases relating to liquor anticipatory bail is not maintainable hence if petitioner will appear before the learned trial court, he will be sent to judicial custody without appreciating the facts of the case in its correct perspective. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen 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 G.O. Case No.550/2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36926 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026 3/3 shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than three cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of three cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T