Rahul Jha @ Rahul Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56802 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2024 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rahul Jha @ Rahul Kumar Jha S/o Bipin Jha, "Wrongly mentioned in the F.I.R. S/O Dilip Kumar Gupta", Resident of Village Morwa Dih, P.S. - Musarigharari, Distt. - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Meena Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2024
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 offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of ten cases.
4. Allegation is of recovery of 123.12 litres of liquor from an open field.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and even the alleged recovery is from a place which does not belong to the petitioner and is accessible to public at large. It is further submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56802 of 2024(2) dt.09-08-2024 2/3 petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar. It is next submitted that the police in majority of the cases implicate either at the instance of the Chawkidar, local people, secret information and confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding proper investigation of the case. It is also submitted that once an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police are implicating mechanically.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Musarigharari P.S. Case No. 75 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. However, the learned trial court, before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner, shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56802 of 2024(2) dt.09-08-2024 3/3 antecedent of more than ten cases in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T