Nageshwar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60004 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2024 Thana- MEDNI CHAUKI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Nageshwar Mahto Son of Late Ganga Mahto R/V- Village- Banshipur Chandra Tola, Ward no. 03, P.S.- Medini Chowki, Distt.- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakhi Kumar Mr.Rabi Bhushan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Khurshid Anwar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-08-2024 Heard Ms Rakhi Kumari, learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This is an application for grant of bail to the petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Medni Chowki P.S. Case No. 112 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of indulge in trafficking of illicit wine. The police conducted raid and recovered 15 litres of countrymade liquor from the toilet situated in the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the house in question is a joint family house where several persons reside and as such the petitioner cannot be made sole

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60004 of 2024(2) dt.31-08-2024 2/3 responsible for that. It is next contended that the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on account of one criminal antecedent of identical nature and save and except the aforesaid fact, there is no other cogent material. The seizure list clearly reveals that the witnesses are none-else but the police personnel. Moreover, had the recovery been made from the house of the petitioner, copy of the seizure list would have certainly been served upon the petitioner or his family members but this has not been done. Thus, mala fide is writ large.

5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State opposed the bail application.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the infirmities in the search and seizure, coupled with the fact that the alleged recovery has been made from the joint family house, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-V-cum-Special Excise Court No.2, Lakhisarai in connection with Medni Chowki P.S. Case No. 112 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner with further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60004 of 2024(2) dt.31-08-2024 3/3 conditions which are as follows:- (i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the trial.

(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial. (iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.

(v) 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 immediate step for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.

(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- U T