Vijay Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38683 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2024 Thana- BARUN District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Vijay Chaudhary Son of Raju Chaudhary Resident of Village - Bhuian Toli, Keshav Market, P.S.- Barun, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Adarsh Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 27-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Barun P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024, lodged on 23.03.2024 under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 37 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. As per the prosecution case, FIR has been lodged against two named accused persons including the present petitioner against whom there is an allegation of theft.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel also submits that the offence of excise act has not been attracted against the present petitioner as he has not been apprehended at the place of occurrence. Counsel further submits that the name of the petitioner has been figured in this case only by virtue of confessional statement of the co-accused. Counsel also submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38683 of 2024(2) dt.27-05-2024 2/2 that it is true that some recovery has alleged to be made from his possession, but until and unless the TIP shall not certify it, it may not be accepted.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is in custody since 04.04.2024. Counsel further submits that section 392 of the IPC is of magisterial triable and section 37 of the Excise Act is not attracted in the present case, so far as the case of petitioner is concerned.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner above named be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise Court No.1, Aurangabad in connection with Barun P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 437(3) Cr.P.C.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Divyansh/- U T