Allowed

Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC28 Jul 2022CR. MISC./22268/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna heard a bail petition in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Observation was made that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot, the chargesheet was filed, and there was no likelihood of tampering with evidence. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner's release on bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the petitioner on bail of Rs. 10,000/- with sureties liable to the Exclusive Special Excise Court, Nawada, after framing of charges.

Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22268 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2021 Thana- ROH District- Nawada

¶3

======================================================

¶4

RAJESH KUMAR @ RAJESH CHAUDHARY S/o Dakhan Chaudhary R/o Village- Govindpur Dih, P.S.- Govindpur, District- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Anbzarul Haque Sahara ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 28-07-2022

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to

¶14

make necessary correction in para 13 of the bail petition in course of day.

¶15

Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶17

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Roh P.S. Case No. 230/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) & 37 (b) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶18

As per prosecution case, there is alleged recovery of total 12 liters country made wine from the possession of coaccused, Wale Ram and Pradip Ram and the said co-accused

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22268 of 2022(2) dt.28-07-2022 2/3

¶20

disclosed the name of the petitioner. The accusation against the petitioner is that he is preparing the wine and supplying it. The petitioner was not apprehended on the spot.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner was not apprehended on the spot and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submits that the name of the petitioner has been sprang up in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, Wale Ram and Pradip Ram. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 28.02.2022 and bears criminal antecedent of three cases in which two cases are of similar nature and he is on bail in all cases. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶22

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶23

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, petitioner was not apprehended on the spot, charge sheet has already been submitted and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail after framing of

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22268 of 2022(2) dt.28-07-2022 3/3

¶25

charge on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court-2, Nawada, in connection with Roh P.S. Case No. 230/2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶26

(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.

¶27

(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.

¶28

(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.

¶29

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶30

amitkumar/-

¶31

U T

Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Afaque Alam @ Afakar Vs the State of Bihar

Anarjeet Kumar @ Anarjeet Paswan @ Amarjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sumit Kumar Mahton Vs the State of Bihar

Haji Saleem @ Saleem Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar

Mintu Yadav @ Mantu Yadav @ Mantu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Saheb Raut Vs The State of Bihar