Kuldeep Kumar Singh @ Kuldeep ... vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3993 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 26908 of 2021
     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2020 Thana- KALUAHI District- Madhubani
 ======================================================

Kuldeep Kumar Singh @ Kuldeep Singh @ Kuldeep Mahto, aged about 45 years, Gender-Male, Son of Teji Lal Mahto, Resident of Village - Kanhauli, Turkaha, PS- Khajauli, District- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
 For the State            :       Ms. Pronoti Singh, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06-08-2021

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

02.08.2021, which was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, learned counsel for

the petitioner and Ms. Pronoti Singh, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

4. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Khajauli PS Case No. 221 of 2020 dated 20.10.2020, instituted Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26908 of 2021 dt.06-08-2021

under Sections 272, 273, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and

30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Act').

5. As per the allegation, the police on information that a

person was carrying liquor on a motorcycle reached the place, a

person was seen coming on a motorcycle on which there was a

plastic sack in the bag and after seeing the police, he had tried to

run away but was caught and disclosed his name as Shambhu

Sahani. It is alleged that he disclosed that he used to sell the liquor

to the petitioner and from the sack 160 bottles containing 48 litres

of nepali liquor was seized.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

neither was he at the spot where the recovery was made nor the

motorcycle or the recovered article belongs to him. It was

submitted that the person who was caught is also not connected to

the petitioner as he is of a different village. Learned counsel

submitted that only on the basis of the statement of the arrested

co-accused that too, before the police, he has been implicated in

the present case. Learned counsel drew the attention of the Court

to the seizure list in which though name of two witnesses have

been mentioned but the signature is only of one witness, namely,

Shakuni Kumar Ram whereas the other witness Jai Kishore Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26908 of 2021 dt.06-08-2021

Paswan has not signed. Thus, it was submitted that there is serious

lapse with regard to the recovery itself. Learned counsel submitted

that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Summing up his

arguments, learned counsel submitted that as there is nothing to

connect the petitioner with the seized motorcycle or liquor, the bar

of Section 76(2) of the Act, relating to maintainability of the

present petition, would not apply.

7. Learned APP submitted that the arrested co-accused

has stated that he used to get the wine and used to sell it to the

petitioner and further, that the motorcycle was stolen and provided

to him by the petitioner.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

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

finds that as per the allegation itself, the arrested co-accused has

only taken the name of the petitioner and has admitted that he

used to bring the liquor, though for being sold to the petitioner and

further that the motorcycle was stolen and also the seizure list not

bearing the signature of the second independent witness despite

his name being mentioned, both in the FIR as well as the seizure

list, but signature of only one witness having been taken, the

Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26908 of 2021 dt.06-08-2021

9. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender before

the Court below within six weeks from today, 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 Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd

cum Special Judge, Excise Act, Madhubani in Khajauli PS Case

No. 221 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, (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 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26908 of 2021 dt.06-08-2021

the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner.

                     11.     The     petition      stands     disposed         of   in   the

           aforementioned terms.



                                                (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)


P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR
U
T