Chhotu Yadav @ Pradeep Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21140 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2023 Thana- SONBERSHA RAJ District- Saharsa ====================================================== Chhotu Yadav @ Pradeep Yadav, Son Of Sri Bidan Yadav R/O-Amrita Puwari Tola, Ward No. 5, P.S.-Sonbarsa Raj Distt.-Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Diwakar Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-03-2024

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 30(a) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the allegation is of recovery of 22 litres of liquor from a bush near bank of river.

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 alleged recovery is from a place, which is accessible to public at large and does not belong to the petitioner and he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar. It is next submitted that in most of the cases, innocent persons are being implicated by the police either at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21140 of 2024(2) dt.28-03-2024 2/2 the instance of Chaukidar or local people. It is thus submitted that if the Chaukidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence, then why he did not inform the police earlier prior to institution of the instant F.I.R., which cast an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when admittedly petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the 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 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 Incharge learned Exclusive Special Judge Excise, Saharsa in connection with Sonbarsa Raj P. S. Case No.240 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T