Mritunjay Kumar @ Sintu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38232 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2024 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== Mritunjay Kumar @ Sintu Yadav Son of Parmanad Rai R/O New Atwarpur, P.O. Kurthaul, P.S- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashi Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Asha Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2024

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 offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 16.02 liters of liquor from the house of Parmanand Yadav.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the fact that he is son of Parmanand Yadav. It is also submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and the house, in question, is a joint family 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38232 of 2024(2) dt.27-06-2024 2/2 the house was within his knowledge and he came to be implicated by the local person, but then the name of the person who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

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 trial court 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 214 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. However, it is made clear the learned Trial Court before 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 even one case in that event, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T