Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 421 (PAT)

Niraj Kumar v. State Of Bihar

2021-06-08

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

body2021
JUDGMENT Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. - The matter has been heard via video conferencing. 2. The case has been heard out of turn on the basis of motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioner yesterday, which was allowed. 3. Heard Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Arif, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State. 4. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Kanti PS Case No. 767 of 2019 dated 12.10.2019, instituted under Sections 30(a), 38 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. 5. This is the second attempt for bail by the petitioner as earlier such prayer was rejected by order dated 09.12.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 78123 of 2019. 6. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with four other co-accused was dealing in illicit liquor and from his house, there is recovery of 778 litres of foreign liquor. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it was a joint house of the petitioner and two other co-accused namely Uma Shankar Singh, who is the father of the petitioner and Dhiraj Kumar Singh, who is the brother of the petitioner. It was submitted that the brother Dhiraj Kumar Singh, who was arrested later has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench by order dated 16.12.2019 in Cr. Misc. No. 83044 of 2019. Learned counsel submitted that the father of the petitioner namely, Uma Shankar Singh who was arrested along with the petitioner on 13.10.2019 had moved for bail along with the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 78132 of 2019 and his prayer was also rejected but later on by order dated 17.02.2021, he has been granted bail in Cr. Misc. No. 12798 of 2020. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. 8. Learned APP submitted that the house from which recovery has been made was also owned by the petitioner. 9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. 8. Learned APP submitted that the house from which recovery has been made was also owned by the petitioner. 9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Excise, Muzaffarpur in Kanti PS Case No. 767 of 2019 subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner, and (iii) that the petitioner shall also give an undertaking to the Court that he shall not indulge in any illegal/criminal activity, act in violation of any law/statutory provisions, tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds. The petitioner shall cooperate in the case and be present before the Court on each and every date. Failure to cooperate or being absent on two consecutive dates, without sufficient cause, shall also lead to cancellation of his bail bonds. 10. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner, to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 11. The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.