Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33683 of 2025 Arising out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- MANIGACHI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar Singh S/o Sitaram Singh Resident of Village- Katma, Police Station- Manigachhi, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s:
Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Manigachhi P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He has no criminal antecedent.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that on the basis of a secret information house of Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar Singh (Petitioner) was searched and a person was seen fleeing from the place who was apprehended and who disclosed his name as Pramod Singh @ Pramod Kumar Singh and on search of the residential house, cattle shed and the nearby areas total 2760.840 litres of foreign liquor was recovered. It is further alleged that the apprehended person disclosed name of his
2/4 accomplice as Ranjit Ray and had also pointed out that pick up van which was parked outside the house of the petitioner was used in transportation of the said liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he has no concern with the seized incriminating liquor. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that no such recovery as stated has been made and only in order to settle personal score the petitioner has been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that the pick up van which was parked outside the house does not belong to the petitioner and no incriminating article was recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner and admittedly not even from the vehicle which was parked outside the house of the petitioner. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 06.04.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has submitted that huge quantity of foreign liquor was recovered from the cow shed of the petitioner and nearby places.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel and taking into account the fact that the petitioner has
3/4 clean antecedent and is in custody since 06.04.2025, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-II, Darbhanga in connection with Manigachhi P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025, subject to the the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned Trial Court.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If any subsequent case of similar nature is lodged against the petitioner, the prosecution shall be at liberty to approach the learned Court below for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
4/4 (v) And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of the same or in the name of verification.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Vikash/- U T