Darbhanga v. THE STATE OF BIHAR PATNA
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 420, 467, 468
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018 s. 30(a)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 100
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : : For the Petitioner/s For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Adv. Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, A.P.P. ORAL ORDER 2 18-01-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in para 13 of the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner during the course of the day.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Darbhanga Sadar P.S. Case No. 561 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 34 of the I.P.C. and Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.
As per prosecution case, altogether 1,832.115 litre foreign liquor was recovered from two pick-up vans and glass Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84310 of 2023(2) dt.18-01-2024 factory in question. Apprehended co-accused Gulab Kumar disclosed the name of petitioner and others who succeeded in fleeing away from the place of occurrence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not the owner of either seized pick-up vans or closed glass factory in question. Petitioner is in custody since
30.09.2023 and bears criminal antecedent of five cases in which he is on bail. Charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits that the name of the present petitioner has been transpired in this case upon the confessional statement of co-accused Gulab Kumar Yadav. Except confessional statement of co-accused, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the complicity of the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. There is no compliance of Section 100 of Cr.P.C. Co-accused Gulab Yadav @ Gulab Kumar Yadav upon whose confessional statement the name of the present petitioner has been transpired in this case, has already been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 70497 of 2023 and the case of present petitioner stands on better footing. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84310 of 2023(2) dt.18-01-2024
The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, co-accused has already been granted bail, charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge-I, (Excise Act), Darbhanga in connection with Darbhanga Sadar P.S. Case No. 561 of 2023, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application. (ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84310 of 2023(2) dt.18-01-2024 the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T
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.