Saurabh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5951 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2023 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali ====================================================== Saurabh Kumar Son of Ravindra Singh Resident of Village Karhania, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shyameshwar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-02-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the petition during course of the day.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 261 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
4. As per prosecution case, 425 litre illicit liquor was recovered from Alto car in question which was being driven by the petitioner and he was apprehended on the spot.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5951 of 2024(2) dt.08-02-2024 2/3 as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that petitioner is not owner of the vehicle in question. Petitioner is merely driver of the said vehicle and he has to follow the instruction of his owner to earn the livelihood. No incriminating article has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has no knowledge regarding the alleged liquor that has been kept in the vehicle in question. Petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2023 and bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel orally submits that charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. There is no compliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C.
6. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1 cum Additional Sessions Judge,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5951 of 2024(2) dt.08-02-2024 3/3 Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 261 of 2023, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) shahzad/- U T