Ram Babu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39695 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2020 Thana- SAKATPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== RAM BABU KUMAR, aged about 26 years, Male, son of Basudeo Mahto, Resident of Village - Ward No.-1 Kewas Nizamat, P.S. - Muffasil, Distt. - Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar No. 1, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

This application for anticipatory bail arises out of Sakatpur P.S. Case No. 84 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act. The petitioner claims that the vehicle, in question, was sold to someone and he has no knowledge about the present crime.

Considering the fact that the petitioner may be the owner of the vehicle, in question, and since it is a commercial vehicle, the role of the petitioner in the present crime is doubtful, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39695 of 2021(2) dt.10-12-2021 2/2 arrest/surrender within four weeks from today in the Court below, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Excise, Darbhanga, in connection with Sakatpur P.S. Case No. 84 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

However, the Court below before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify whether the petitioner was the owner of the vehicle or not at the time of occurrence. If it is found that the petitioner was not the owner of the vehicle at the time of occurrence then the Court below shall accept the bail bonds of the petitioner but if it is found that it is the petitioner, who was the owner of the vehicle at the time of occurrence, in such circumstance, the Court below shall not accept the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) pawan/- U T