Allowed

Satyendra Kumar @ Satyendra Ram @Satyendra Das v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Aug 2022CR. MISC./32166/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order granting bail to the petitioner in a case involving cheque usage by forged hand and illicit liquor trade, subject to conditions including framing of charge and presence on dates.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with conditions under Section 437(3) CrPC, including acceptance of bond only after framing of charge and appearance on fixed dates.

Satyendra Kumar @ Satyendra Ram @Satyendra Das Vs the State… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32166 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-377 Year-2021 Thana- MADANPUR District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Satyendra Kumar @ Satyendra Ram @satyendra Das, Son of Mundar Das, Resident of Village - Budhaul, P.S.- Amas, Distt.- Gaya (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Aman Vishal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 26-08-2022

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State through video conferencing.

¶14

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect.

¶15

In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Madanpur P.S. Case No. 377 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 413 and 314 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a) and 33 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

¶16

As per prosecution case, police received secret information about three persons transporting illicit liquor on a stolen motorcycle and the said motorcycle was intercepted and three co-accused persons were apprehended. One of the co-

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32166 of 2022(2) dt.26-08-2022 2/3

¶18

accused persons named this petitioner who was involved in illicit trade of liquor along with other co-accused persons. At the instance of the co-accused, total 490 litres of spirit was recovered from the house of another co-accused.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner was not apprehended from the spot and nothing incriminating has been recovered from his conscious possession. The petitioner has been named in this case only on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Anshu @ Golu Kumar but he has no concern with the said co-accused or the spirit recovered at his instance. The petitioner is in custody since 28.03.2022 and the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶20

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the co-accused named this petitioner for being involved in the illicit trade of liquor. The petitioner is having criminal antecedent.

¶21

Having regard to the submissions made hereinabove and considering the fact that the petitioner was not apprehended from the spot and no recovery has been shown from him and further considering the submission of charge-sheet along with his period of custody, the petitioner above named is directed to

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32166 of 2022(2) dt.26-08-2022 3/3

¶23

be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/(twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Excise Judge- I, Aurangabad (Bihar), in connection with Madanpur P.S. Case No. 377 of 2021, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the following conditions :

¶24

(i) The bail bond of the petitioner will be accepted only after framing of charge, if not already framed.

¶25

(ii) One of the bailors will be the deponent, who has sworn the affidavit.

¶26

(iii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

¶27

(iv) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

¶28

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶29

balmukund/-

¶30

U T

Satyendra Kumar @ Satyendra Ram @Satyendra Das v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyendra Kumar @ Satyendra Ram @Satyendra Das 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

Panchanand Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Ved Prakash Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Sarovar Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Mithlesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Kumar @ Mithilesh Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod @ Vinod Kumar Kali @ Vinod Kali @ Vinod Kali Rakhna Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Baloda Vs The State of Bihar