Mukesh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13816 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-250 Year-2024 Thana- BELA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.
Mukesh Chaudhary S/o- Sitaram Chaudhary Village- Sirsiya Bazar, Ward No.14, P.S.- Bela, District- Sitamarhi 2.
Naresh Kumar @ Naresh Chaudhary S/o- Sitaram Chaudhary VillageSirsiya Bazar, Ward No.14, P.S.- Bela, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-03-2025 Heard Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Bela P.S. Case No. 250 of 2024, F.I.R dated 20.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 540 liters of illicit liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 2 has clean antecedent and petitioner no. 1 carries one criminal antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
2/4 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that the petitioners are not named in the F.I.R and even the local chowkidar has not disclosed the name of the petitioners. He further submits that the name of the petitioners have been transpired on the basis of confessional statement/disclosure made by the co-accused, namely, Sakil Ansari. He further submits that except the aforesaid, no other material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present occurrence. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C / Section 103 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable.
6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid
3/4 down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioners.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts that petitioners are not named in the F.I.R and the name of the petitioners have been transpired on the basis of confessional statement of the coaccused person and even the local chowkidar has not disclosed the name of the petitioners, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge I, Sitamarhi in connection with Bela P.S. Case No.
250 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i.
4/4 sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T