Vijay Mahto @ Vijay Kumar Ray @ Vijay Roy v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46209 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2024 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Vijay Mahto @ Vijay Kumar Ray @ Vijay Roy SON OF RAM PRAKASH RAY @ RAM PRAKASH MAHTO VILLAGE- MOHANPUR, PSMUFFASIL, DIST- SAMASTIPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Atul Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.126 of 2024.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 7.875 liters of liquor from husk house in front of the house of the petitioner.

4. It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and husk house is a place outside the house and is accessible to villagers at large and it appears that someone

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46209 of 2024(2) dt.19-07-2024 2/3 planted meagre amount of liquor in order to implicate the petitioner and his family members. It is further submitted that no prudent person would use his own premises for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated. It is also submitted that based on secret information the petitioner was implicated which is the easiest way to implicate someone.

5. The learned APP for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application.

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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge Excise -Ist, Samastipur in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No.126 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. It is made clear that 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46209 of 2024(2) dt.19-07-2024 3/3 event, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T