SHAMBHU NATH PRASAD v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-
Provisions considered
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh ORAL ORDER 2 10-02-2023 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioner and Ld. APP for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nimachandpur P.S. Case No. 70 of 2017, registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. As per allegation, total 3125.520 litres of liquor was recovered from a truck which was kept in a container. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is the owner of the truck and thus he was not aware of the content of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73756 of 2022(2) dt.10-02-2023 materials loaded in the vehicle.
Operative part
He also submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 20.08.2022. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has moved this Court earlier for anticipatory bail vide Cr Misc. No. 21643 of 2022. However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above- named, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Ld. Exclusive Special Excise Judge-II, Begusarai in connection with Nimachandpur P.S. Case No.
70 of 2017, on the following conditions: Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73756 of 2022(2) dt.10-02-2023 (i) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required. (ii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not hamper on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police or the court whenever his presence is required. (iii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. (iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, Ld. court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73756 of 2022(2) dt.10-02-2023 petitioner. (vi) In case, the petitioner repeats offence of similar nature after enlargement on bail, his bail-bond will be cancelled by the court below. Ld. counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects, if any, pointed out by the office within a period of one month and the Registry is directed to issue the certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections. ashishkr/- U T (Jitendra Kumar, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 30(a).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.