Allowed

Arjun Rai v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Nov 2022CR. MISC./43837/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner, accused of liquor offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and IPC, directing release on furnishing bonds and two sureties under Section 437(3) CrPC subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and cancellation for violation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

Arjun Rai Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43837 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2021 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Arjun Rai, Son of Aklu Ray, Resident of village - Karneji, P.S.- Vaishali (Belsar O.P.), District - Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mrs.Usha Kumari Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 23-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

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

¶15

In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 354 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 272, 273, 413, 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a)/41 (i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶16

As per prosecution case, recovery of 872.91 liters of India made foreign liquor was made from different vehicles and also from the backyard of the house of the co-accused Mukesh Kumar. The name of the petitioner surfaced during investigation for being involved in trade of illicit liquor.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43837 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 2/3

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case as he was neither apprehended from the spot nor anything incriminating has been recovered from his possession. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of any of the vehicles or the place from where recovery has been made. The co-accused Manjay Kumar has been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.04.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No.16329 of 2022. The other co-accused persons have been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 25.02.2022 and 28.02.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos.70450 of 2021 and 71783 of 2021, respectively. The petitioner is in custody since 09.05.2022 and the charge sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶19

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

¶20

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 and the period of custody, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/(twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43837 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 3/3

¶22

the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No.2-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 354 of 2021, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the following conditions :

¶23

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶27

V.K.Pandey/-

¶28

U T

Arjun Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Rai 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

Pappu Das @ Pappu Kumar Das Vs The State of Bihar

Ajeet Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Bechu Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Vinod Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Ganesh Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar