Santosh Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rabindra Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 03-07-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶13

learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his

¶15

arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018 in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No.88 of 2024.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 10 liters of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

¶17

It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018 the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41161 of 2024(2) dt.03-07-2024 2/3

¶19

has been done away with. It is also submitted that the house in question is a joint family property as such it cannot be alleged with certainty that it was petitioner who had kept the liquor in the house or the liquor kept in the house was within the knowledge of the petitioner and he came to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone

¶20

The learned APP for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application.

¶21

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 six 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 Additional Sessions Judge-cumExclusive Special Excise Judge, Court No.2, Gaya in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No.88 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶22

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

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41161 of 2024(2) dt.03-07-2024 3/3

¶24

found that petitioner has antecedent of even one case, in that event, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given

¶25

effect.

¶26

The application stands allowed.

¶27

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶28

Prakash Narayan U T

Santosh Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Nasir Hussain @ Md. Nasir Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Samirul Haque @ Samirul Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Pandit @ Santosh Kumhar @ Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jagannath Yadav @ Jagarnath Yadav @ Jagranath Yadav Vs the State of Bihar