Pawan Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1826 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-392 Year-2023 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Pawan Sahni Son of Rikhan Sahni Village- Godigayan, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran 2.
Jiryodhan Sahni Son of Rikhan Sahni Village- Godigayan, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2024 Heard Mr. Karandeep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 392 of 2023, F.I.R dated 12.09.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 30(a), 32, 34 and 41(i) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 20 liters of country made liquor.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 has clean antecedent and petitioner no. 2
2/4 carries two criminal antecedents other than the present one and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the name of the petitioners have been transpired on the basis of the disclosure made by the local chowkidar. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners and except the disclosure made by the local chowkidar, no other cogent material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present case. He further submits that recovery has been made from the bank of Sikarhana river and the petitioners have no concern at all with the alleged recovery of the illicit liquor. 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 petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable. He further submits that the petitioner no. 2 carries two criminal antecedents other than the present one.
3/4
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.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.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Excise Court No. 1, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 392 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-
1. Petitioners 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
4/4 court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. If the petitioners 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 petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) Vanisha/- U T