Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Yadav @ Sunil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75566 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-294 Year-2020 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== SUNIL KUMAR @ SUNIL KUMAR YADAV @ SUNIL YADAV SON OF HORIL YADAV R/O VILLAGE- CHHOTI RANIPUR, P.S.- FATUHA, DISTRICT- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Harish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 294 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and Section 25(1-B)a, 26 Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, 50 litre mahua liquor and one country pistol recovered from the house of the petitioner and petitioner is alleged to be fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 30.06.2023 and bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel orally submits that charge sheet
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75566 of 2023(2) dt.28-11-2023 2/3 has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits that petitioner is not apprehended on spot. The place of recovery is an abandoned place, which is accessible to all, thereby casting doubt on the exclusive association of any alleged incriminating article with the petitioner. Moreover, the place of recovery does not belong to the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Except suspicion, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the complicity of petitioner with the alleged occurrence. He further submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, petitioner is not apprehended on spot, keeping in view clean antecedent of the petitioner, charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75566 of 2023(2) dt.28-11-2023 3/3 Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Patna City in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 294 of 2020, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) 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.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) vashudha/- U T