Dipak Kumar @ Karu vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3893 Patna

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3189 of 2021
        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                          District- Nawada
      ======================================================

1. Dipak Kumar @ Karu, aged about 20 years, (Male), son of Late Sitaram Prasad, resident of Village- Baseriya, P.S. Sirdalla, District- Nawada.

2. Subodh Kumar Yadav, aged about 24 years, (Male), son of Rajendra Yadav, resident of Village- Chotha, P.S. Rajauli, District Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nasrul Huda Khan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The case has been taken up out of turn on the basis

of motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioner on

26.07.2021, which was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Nasrul Huda Khan, learned counsel for

the petitioner no. 2 and Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the

'APP') for the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

he is not pressing the petition on behalf of the petitioner no.1,

namely, Dipak Kumar @ Karu. Accordingly, the petition stands

disposed off as far as the petitioner no. 1, Dipak Kumar @ Karu, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3189 of 2021 dt.02-08-2021

is concerned and is restricted to petitioner no. 2, Subodh Kumar

Yadav.

5. The petitioner no. 2 apprehends arrest in

connection with GO Case No. 191 of 2020 dated 09.09.2020,

instituted under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and

Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

6. The allegation against the petitioner no.2 is that

when the police during course of checking stopped a Splendor

motorcycle, two persons sitting on it tried to run away, but the

petitioner no. 1 is said to have been caught but later on he also

ran away and on search 45.5 litres of countrymade liquor was

recovered from the motorcycle. It is contended that the other

person, who ran away, was the petitioner no. 2.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner no.2 submitted

that neither the motorcycle nor the liquor recovered belonged to

him and further, that he has no criminal antecedent and only on

suspicion due to mala fide reasons he has been made accused.

Thus, it was contended that since there is nothing to connect the

petitioner to the seized liquor, the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act

would not be attracted.

8. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner was also

riding on the motorcycle and ran away on seeing the police and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3189 of 2021 dt.02-08-2021

from the motorcycle, there has been recovery of countrymade

liquor.

9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, as

there is a categorical stand on behalf of the petitioner no. 2 that

the seized motorcycle does not belong to him and he has no

criminal antecedent, the Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail

to him. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender before

the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner no.

2, namely, Subodh Kumar Yadav, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum Special Judge,

Nawada, in GO Case No. 191 of 2020, subject to the conditions

laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973 and further (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close

relative of the petitioner no. 2, (ii) that the petitioner no. 2 and

the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of

the petitioner no. 2, and (iii) that the petitioner no. 2 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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3189 of 2021 dt.02-08-2021

Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the

undertaking shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds. The

petitioner no. 2 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 no. 2, to the notice of the Court concerned, which

shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity

of hearing to the petitioner no. 2.

11. The petition stands disposed of in the

aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

J. Alam/-

AFR/NAFR U T