Mintu Mahto @ Pintu Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32056 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2022 Thana- MAKER District- Saran ====================================================== Mintu Mahto @ Pintu Mahto Son of Umesh Mahto Resident of VilageJagdishpur, Ketuka, Lachchhi, P.s.- Maker, District - Saran. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

None.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 05-08-2022 Heard learned APP for the State in Virtual Court Proceeding.

Let the defect(s), if any, as pointed out by the office, be removed within four weeks.

No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Maker P.S. Case No. 08/2022 for the offences under Sections 272, 273, 328, 308, 304 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 30(a), 37(B), 33 and 34 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

The allegation in the FIR is that police got information through a viral video that one Md. Isha Tailer has died after consuming spurious liquor. Upon reaching his house, the villagers informed about the alleged spurious liquor being

2/4 manufactured by Munna Mahto and Birendra Mahto. Accordingly, the police raided their house and recovered 1.600 liters of spurious liquor from their house. Birendra Mahto was nabbed and thereafter their shop was also raided from where 380 liters of spurious liquor was recovered/seized from northern room while 9.420 liters of English wine and 220 liters of mix wine and 10 liters of country made wine along with cough syrup and empty bottles, packing machine and other materials were recovered/seized by the police.

It has further been alleged in the FIR that after drinking the said spurious liquor from the shop of Munna Mahto and Birendra Mahto, number of people died. The names of people who died were Ramnath Mahto, Md. Isha Tailer and Samar Mahto while Paltan Mahto and Suraj Baitha were under treatment.

After lodging of the FIR, the accused persons were arrested.

From the averment made in the bail application, it is evident that there is no recovery/seizure of the illicit liquor from either his possession or his house and only because of the confessional statement of the accused, Birendra Mahato, he is in custody since 08.04.2022 (as stated in paragraph-21 of the bail

3/4 application) and the petitioner is having only one criminal antecedent Taking into account the aforesaid facts that allegation of manufacturing as also selling of the spurious liquor is/are attributed mainly to Munna Mahto and Birendra Mahto from whose shop/house the alleged materials have been recovered/seized and the petitioner herein remained in custody since 08.04.2022 as also the charge sheet stands submitted, this Court is inclined to grant him the privilege of bail. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2nd Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Maker P.S. Case No. 08 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner, who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reasons will entail his cancellation of bail by the Trial Court itself;

4/4 (iii) he shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next six months to mark his presence; (iv) he shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds;

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. With the aforesaid observations, the bail application is allowed.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T