Allowed

Permeshwar Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Nov 2022CR. MISC./51035/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The court relied on the Full Bench judgment in Ram Vinay Yadav, noting that the seized codeine syrup was in a saloon and not in the petitioner's conscious possession, warranting release on bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail upon arrest or surrender, furnished bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Permeshwar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51035 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-388 Year-2022 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria

¶3

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

¶4

PERMESHWAR THAKUR Son of Kalanand Thakur R/o village - Nawajgarh, Ward No.- 12, P.S. and District – Araria ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s

¶6

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

¶7

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nafisuzzoha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 21-11-2022

¶11

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.

¶12

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

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶14

Recovery is of 1000 Ml of Codeine Cough Syrup.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submits that without any Lab Report whether the Syrup in question come under the purview of Excise matter or not the prosecution proceeded against the petitioner. Further submits that however 1000 Ml

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51035 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 2/4

¶17

of Codeine Cough Syrup has been recovered from the Saloon 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.

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51035 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 3/4

¶22

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 Araria P.S. Case No. 388 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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.

¶25

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

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51035 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 4/4

¶27

acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶28

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶29

Nitesh/-

¶30

U T

Permeshwar Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Permeshwar Thakur 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

Statutes considered

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

Vikky Yadav @ Gopal Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Bharat Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar