Allowed

Jamil Ahmad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Mar 2024CR. MISC./21702/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by a man in custody for recovery of 560 litres of illicit spirit under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Considering the seizure list lacking independent witnesses, absence of criminal antecedents, and period of custody, the High Court granted bail after framing of charge, with conditions if chargesheet not filed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail after framing of charge on Rs.10,000 bond with two like sureties to Special Judge, Excise-1, Aurangabad.

Jamil Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21702 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2024 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Jamil Ahmad Son Of Md. Salimuddin Ansari Resident Of Village- Batrahi, Ps- Ambad, Distt- Aurangabad

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anirudh Kumar Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 20-03-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶13

learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is in custody in connection

¶15

with Aurangabad Muffasil P.S Case No. 40 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶16

As per prosecution case, total 560 litre illicit spirit was recovered.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21702 of 2024(2) dt.20-03-2024 2/3

¶19

petitioner. On perusal of seizure list there is no independent witness. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 25.01.2024.

¶20

However, learned APP for the State oppose

¶21

the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶22

On perusal of the FIR, impugned order and period of custody and also considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, let the above named petitioner be released on bail after framing of the charge on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Special Judge, Excise-1, Aurangabad (Bihar) in connection with Aurangabad Muffasil P.S Case No. 40 of 2024.

¶23

The trial court is directed to conclude the proceeding of framing of charge according to law within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21702 of 2024(2) dt.20-03-2024 3/3

¶25

this order. However, it is made clear that if the chargesheet has not been submitted then the petitioner shall be released on bail on the above conditions and he shall be present physically on each and every date before the trial court till conclusion of the proceeding of framing of charge.

¶26

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶27

Mayank/-

¶28

U T

Jamil Ahmad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamil Ahmad 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

Shankar Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Kuldeep Yadav @ Kuldeep Kumar @ Bhuwar @Bhuwar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Shubham Singh @ Subham Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar @ Alok Kumar @ Alok Vs The State of Bihar