Mathura Dhangad @ Muthura Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92075 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2025 Thana- SATHI District- West Champaran ====================================================== Mathura Dhangad @ Muthura Mahto S/o- Late Deep Dhangad @ Deep Mahto Vill- Gulab Nagar Dhangad Toli, Ps- Sathi Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Gupta For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026
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 Section 274 and 275 of the B.N.S. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 52 litres of liquor from house of petitioner and 150 litres of mahua pass was destroyed.
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 even the house in question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92075 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 2/3 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 after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar, but then, it is submitted that if Chaukidar was aware of the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police prior to institution of the present F.I.R., which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
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.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 Sathi P. S. Case No.274 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92075 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 3/3 down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. The application stands allowed.
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 even one case, then it would be presumed that petitioner for the purposes of obtaining anticipatory bail had concealed his antecedent before this Court, in that event, the present 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) vikash/- U T