Pramod Kumar Mahto @ Pramod Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29570 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Pramod Kumar Mahto @ Pramod Mahto, Son of Ramprasad Mahto Resident of Village - Sakhmohan Ward No.- 18, P.S.- Bibhutipur, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rambabu Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Khurshid Anwar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-04-2024

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 has antecedent of one case and the allegation is of recovery of 802.800 litres of liquor from bathan of the petitioner.

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 presumed offender has been done away with. It is next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29570 of 2024(2) dt.22-04-2024 2/3 submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of Chaukidar with whom he is on an inimical term. It is also submitted that no prudent person would use his own place for committing an occurrence and thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated. 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 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. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge-1, Samastipur in connection with Bibhutipur P. S. Case No.33 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. It is made clear that the learned trial Court before

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29570 of 2024(2) dt.22-04-2024 3/3 accepting the 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 more than one case, in that event, the present anticipatory bail application shall not be given effect to.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T