Uma Chaudhary @ Uma Shankar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16896 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2025 Thana- JANTA BAZAR District- Saran ====================================================== Uma Chaudhary @ Uma Shankar Chaudhary S/O Sakaldeo Chaudhary R/O Village- Panditpur, P.S- Janta Bajar, Distt.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mirtunjay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2025

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 16 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner, 11 litres of liquor from a graveyard and 32.94 litres of liquor from a mustard field.

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 after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16896 of 2025(2) dt.16-04-2025 2/3 presumed offender has been done away with and even the house in question is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged 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 he came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar. It is further 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 cast an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

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 Third Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Saran at Chapra in connection with Janta Bajar P. S. Case No.33 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16896 of 2025(2) dt.16-04-2025 3/3

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, 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