Shashi Bhushan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26110 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2021 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== SHASHI BHUSHAN YADAV Son of Late Shiv Narain Yadav Vill.- Mabbi Dargah, P.S.- Rosera, Distt.- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudama Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-07-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State through virtual Court proceedings.

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rosera (District - Samastipur) P.S. Case No. 100 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 272, 273 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 31.01.2022.

The allegation against the petitioner is to be engaged in illegal trade of illicit liquor, where, there is recovery of 964

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26110 of 2022(2) dt.08-07-2022 2/3 litres of illicit IMFL.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that alleged recovery has been made from maize field of Mahesh Mahto, as per FIR. It has further been submitted that nothing surfaced during course of the investigation, which may connect the petitioner with the alleged recovery of illicit liquor. It has further been submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent. While concluding the argument, it has been submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Learned APP, while opposing the prayer of bail, fairly conceded the fact that alleged recovery has been made from the maize field, as per FIR.

Considering the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, as alleged recovery is not made from conscious physical possession of the petitioner, who is man of clean antecedent coupled with the fact that charge-sheet has already been submitted in this case, let the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Rosera (District-Samastipur) P.S. Case No. 100 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26110 of 2022(2) dt.08-07-2022 3/3 Special Judge Excise Court 1, Samastipur, subject to the following conditions:

"(i) Accused/Petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be physically present on each and every date before the Trial Court till conclusion of the trial and exemption from physical appearance be allowed by the Trial Court, only on medical ground of the petitioner duly supported by the documents.

(ii) That one of the bailors shall be Sunil Kumar, who is the brother of the petitioner and deponent of the present bail petition."

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) S.Katyayan/- U