Allowed

MD Nayeem v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2022CR. MISC./3457/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner was granted bail in connection with a case under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The court noted recovery was not from the petitioner's physical possession, he had clean antecedents, and the chargesheet was pending. Bail was allowed on Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount subject to specified conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount subject to conditions of cooperating in the trial and physical presence.

MD Nayeem Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3457 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2021 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Md Nayeem Son of Ajamatullah Resident of Village - Khaira, P.S.- Saraiya (O.P. Jaitpur), Dist.t- Muzaffarpur.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivanand Singh, Advocate For the State : MS. Veena Rani Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 01-07-2022

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

APP for the State thorough virtual Court proceedings.

¶13

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil Aurangabad P.S. Case No. 162 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

¶15

The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 15.07.2020.

¶16

The allegation against the petitioner is to run away from the place of occurrence, where there was a recovery of 1323 liters of foreign liquor and 11,000 kg of Makka from a truck, bearing registration no. BR 11 L/0993.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3457 of 2022(3) dt.01-07-2022 2/3

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the the recovery has not been made from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner, as per seizure list. It has been submitted that similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by one of the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court through Cr. Misc. No. 63177 of 2021 dated 03.03.2022. While concluding the argument, it has further been submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and chargesheet has already been submitted in this case, as such there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶19

Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State while opposing the prayer of bail fairly conceded that the recovery has not been made from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, as the recovery has not been made from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner, who is a man of clean antecedent coupled with the fact that chargesheet has already been submitted in this case, let the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Muffasil Aurangabad P.S. Case No. 162 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3457 of 2022(3) dt.01-07-2022 3/3

¶22

like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Excise, Aurangabad, Bihar, subject to the following conditions:

¶23

“(i) Accused/Petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be physically present on each and every date before the Trial Court till conclusion of the trial and exemption from physical appearance be allowed by the Trial Court, only on medical ground of the petitioner, duly supported by the documents.

¶24

(ii) That one of the bailors shall be Md. Masum Raja, who is the brother-in-law of the petitioner and deponent of the present bail petition.”

¶25

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶26

Ankit/Shashank/- U T

MD Nayeem v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Nayeem 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mana Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Ram Vs the State of Bihar

Surati Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sumangal Sahni @ Sheomangal Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

MD Parwez Alam @ Golu Vs The State of Bihar

Hulash Rai @ Hulash Ray Vs the State of Bihar