Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57809/2023bail granted

Sanjit Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57809 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2022 Thana- DHANKUND District- Banka ====================================================== Sanjit Ray S/O Anarud Ray R/O Village- Jalalpur, Ps. Matori, Dist. Samastipur (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brij Nandad Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-10-2023 Heard Mr. Brij Nandan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ramesh Chandra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhankud P.S. Case No. 135 of 2022 F.I.R. dated 27.12.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022.

3. Recovery is of 610.125 litres of foreign liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the ground that he is the owner of the vehicle in question from the illicit liquor was recovered. He further submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. that nothing has

2/4 been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and in fact the petitioner has already sold the vehicle in question to one Santosh Kumar @ Bhola vide agreement dated 23.05.2022 much prior to the present F.I.R. and he has no concern at all with the alleged recovery of illicit liquor or the vehicle in question. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the petitioner. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the prearrest bail would not be maintainable.

6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019(2) P.LJ.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.

3/4

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and petitioner having clean antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order. be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-II, Banka in connection with Dhankud PS. Case No. 135 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

4/4 any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T