Patna High CourtCR. MISC./48924/2024bail granted

Sujeet Chaudhary @ Sujeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-23Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48924 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2024 Thana- SRINAGAR District- West Champaran ====================================================== SUJEET CHAUDHARY @ SUJEET KUMAR S/O KAILASH CHAUDHARY R/O VILL- WARD NO. 08, JAGADAMBAPUR, BHAWANIPUR, P.S- SRINAGAR, DISTT.- WEST CHAMPARAN. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2024

1. 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 in connection with Srinagar P.S. Case No.65 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 10.98 liters of liquor from a poultry farm 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 after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018 the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48924 of 2024(2) dt.23-07-2024 2/3 has been done away with. It is also submitted that no prudent businessman would use his own business premises for committing an occurrence and thus would create evidence against himself and hence would get implicated and at the same time would bring disrefute to his business. It is further submitted that it appears that some customers left the liquor on seeing the police and fled and the petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of Ramesh in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

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 Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-II, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Srinagar P.S. Case No.65 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48924 of 2024(2) dt.23-07-2024 3/3 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.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T