Allowed

Vikky Yadav @ Gopal Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Nov 2022CR. MISC./50721/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving recovery of illicit liquor. The Full Bench decision and the fact that liquor was recovered from a joint house without proof of conscious possession supported the grant of bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each in Special Case No.5202 of 2021.

Vikky Yadav @ Gopal Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50721 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2021 Thana- PATNA CITY CHOWK District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

VIKKY YADAV @ GOPAL YADAV S/o Vijay Yadav R/o village- Morcha Road, P.S.- Chowk, District- Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Asha Kumari,APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 21-11-2022

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a),37(b)(c)/32(1)/32(3)/41(1)/41(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act 2018 and Section 47 of of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶15

Recovery is of 20 liters of illicit liquor.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50721 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 2/4

¶18

Further submits that the recovery has been made from the joint house of the petitioner and not from petitioner’s possession. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the petitioner. 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 petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner 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. Further submits that the petitioner carries three more cases other than the present one.

¶20

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) PLJR 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.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner, let the

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50721 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 3/4

¶23

petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending in connection with Special Case No.5202 of 2021 arising out of Chowk P.S. Case No. 302 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

¶24

(1) Petitioner 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 Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶25

(2) If the petitioner tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50721 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 4/4

¶28

criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.

¶29

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶30

Nitesh/-

¶31

U T

Vikky Yadav @ Gopal Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikky Yadav @ Gopal Yadav 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumar Abhishek Vs The State of Bihar

Pawan Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Dukhan Paswan @ Rajballam Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Permeshwar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Bharat Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar