Ram Jinis Mahto @ Jinis Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60968 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2024 Thana- BATHNAHA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ram Jinis Mahto @ Jinis Mahto S/o- Chalitar Mahto Resident Of VillageBairaha, Ps- Bathnaha, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-08-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and 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 Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the allegation is of recovery of 2.4 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and after Amendment in the Excise Act, 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with and even the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60968 of 2024(2) dt.23-08-2024 2/3 house, which is a joint family property and thus, it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was the petitioner, who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within his knowledge and he came to be implicated at the instance of local people, but then, the police in majority of cases implicating innocent persons either at the behest of Chaukidar, local person, secret informant or confessional statement in a mechanical manner without holding a proper investigation, when admittedly petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. 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, Exclusive Special Excise Court-1, Sitamarhi in connection with Bathnaha P. S. Case No.248 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The application stands allowed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60968 of 2024(2) dt.23-08-2024 3/3

8. 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 event, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T