Jokhan Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90944 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-328 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Jokhan Mahto S/o Late Chaturi Mahto Resident of Village- Harpur, Police Station- Piprakothi, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Karandeep Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2026

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 Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 20 litres of liquor from house of the petitioner and 6 litres of liquor from house of Munni Devi. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90944 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 2/3 knowledge and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of chowkidar but then it is submitted that if chowkidar 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, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.

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 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No.328/2025, 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.90944 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026 3/3 shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, 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 is a person with clean antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed forthwith.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T