Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to be released on bail upon arrest or surrender within ten weeks, on bail-bonds of Rs.500/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Court No.V, Gaya, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions and to verification of his criminal antecedent by the trial court (bail ineffective if any prior case is found).

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, sought in anticipation of his arrest in Amas P.S. Case No.63 of 2017 (offences under Sections 272, 273 and 34 IPC and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act), should be released on anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of petitioner's counsel, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail: in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within ten weeks, on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs.500/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Court No.V, Gaya, in connection with Amas P.S. Case No.63 of 2017, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial Court shall, before accepting the petitioner's bail bonds, verify his criminal antecedent; if the petitioner is found to have antecedent of even one case, the present anticipatory bail shall not be given effect to.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL — Patna High Court (Satyavrat Verma, J) allows anticipatory bail application of Sunil Kumar in connection with Amas P.S. Case No.63 of 2017, Thana AMAS, District Gaya, registered for offences under Sections 272, 273 and 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act; allegation (per petitioner's counsel) of recovery of 360 litres of liquor from an auto; petitioner claimed clean antecedents, that he was not arrested from the spot, was neither owner nor driver of the seized auto, and was implicated only on the confessional statement of Ravi Kumar made in police custody; petitioner directed to be released on bail upon arrest or surrender within ten weeks on bail-bonds of Rs.500/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Court No.V, Gaya, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions; trial court to verify criminal antecedents before accepting bail bonds — if antecedent of even one case is found, the anticipatory bail shall not be given effect to.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36708 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2017 Thana- AMAS District- Gaya

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

Sunil Kumar, Son of Late Suresh Prasad @ Suresh Paswan Resident of Village- Shivganj, P.S. - Dehri, District - Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Md. Javed Jafar Khan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Lal ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 21-06-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 and 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the Excise Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the allegation is of recovery of 360 litres of liquor from an auto.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and is neither the owner nor the driver of the seized auto and he came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Ravi Kumar in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value, when admittedly

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36708 of 2024(2) dt.21-06-2024 2/2

petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of ten weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Court No.V, Gaya in connection with Amas P. S. Case No.63 of 2017, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

The application stands allowed.

It is made clear that the learned trial Court before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioner shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in the event, if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, in that event, the present anticipatory bail application shall not be given effect to.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

vikash/-

U T