Alok Kumar @ Alok Sahu @ Aalok Sahu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67916 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2023 Thana- SINDHIYA DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== ALOK KUMAR @ ALOK SAHU @ AALOK SAHU Son of MANOJ SAHU Resient of village- Singhiya, Police Station- Singhiya, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mahendra Pratap For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-10-2023 Heard Mr. Mahendra Pratap, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap singh, learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 203 of 2023 registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Recovery is of 61.740 liters of foreign liquor. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is of clean antecedent, is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the ground of suspicion. He further submits that on bare perusal of the F.I.R. and the seizure list, it appears that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather the alleged recovery has been made from a pit near the Janera crop field of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged recovery. He further submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67916 of 2023(2) dt.19-10-2023 2/3 the petitioner has been made accused in this case merely because the land in question belongs to the petitioner. He further submits that there is non-compliance of Section 100 Cr.P.C. while preparing the seizure list, therefore, no case would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner referring to the provisions contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submits that this application seeking pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable. 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.L.J.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.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the petitioner bears a clean antecedent, let the, above named, petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67916 of 2023(2) dt.19-10-2023 3/3 each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge-I, (Excise Act), Samastipur in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 203 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also with the 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be canceled 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.

And, further condition that 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 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) brajesh/- U T