Ajit Kumar Yadav @ Ajeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31647 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2024 Thana- BAHERI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Ajit Kumar Yadav @ Ajeet Yadav S/o Dinesh Yadav R/o vill - Kerwakoeth, P.S. - Baheri, Distt. - Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.
4. Allegation is of recovery of 16.200 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.
5. 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 in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It is further submitted that the house in question is a joint family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31647 of 2024(2) dt.30-04-2024 2/3 property as such 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 the knowledge of the petitioner and he came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is next submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware of the involvement of petitioner in the occurrence then whey he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner admittedly is a person with clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. 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 from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Baheri P.S. Case No. 30 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31647 of 2024(2) dt.30-04-2024 3/3
8. However, the learned trial court, before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner, shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T