Sobhan Kumar @ Soman Kumar vs State Of Bihar

1 The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter

referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the pendency of the application petitioner no. 2, namely, Tutu Yadav @ Harendra has

been arrested and, thus, application on his behalf may be permitted to be withdrawn as it has become infructuous.

In view thereof, as prayed for by learned counsel for the petitioners, the petition on behalf of petitioner no. 2, namely, Tutu Yadav @ Harendra

stands disposed off as withdrawn and is restricted to petitioners no. 1, 3 and 4, namely, Sobhan Kumar @ Soman Kumar, Bikhal Yadav @ Birmal

Yadav and Bucha Kumar @ Ravi Kumar, respectively.

The petitioners no. 1, 3 and 4 apprehend arrest in connection with Sigori PS Case No. 110 of 2020 dated 09.07.2020, instituted under Sections 272,

273 and 290 of the Indian Penal Code and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

The allegation against twenty named accused, including the petitioners, is of being involved in the manufacture of countrymade liquor and on prior

information, when the police went to the bank of the river, many persons were seen fleeing in the river and from the bamboo clump, 240 litres of

country-made mahua liquor was recovered as also four big gas cylinders, four gas stoves and various utensils for making liquor were also recovered.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they have been falsely implicated and have no connection with either the recovered utensils or

the mahua liquor. It was submitted that as per the FIR itself the police had already mentioned the name of the petitioners along with others, but has not

disclosed the source of information. Further, it was submitted that nothing has been recovered from the house or property belonging to the petitioners

and that they have no criminal antecedent. Thus, learned counsel submitted that since there is nothing to connect the petitioners to the recovered

articles, including liquor, bar of Section 76(2) of the Act with regard to maintainability of the present petition would not apply. It was submitted that

Hulas Yadav, Parmanand Yadav and Bhushan Yadav have been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench by order dated 05.04.2021 passed in

Cr. Misc. No. 4068 of 2021.

Learned APP submitted that huge amount of recovery has been made. However, it was not controverted that recovery is from the bamboo clump

below the bank of the river and not from the place which was owned or is connected to the petitioners.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioners no. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sobham Kumar @ Soman Kumar, Bikhal Yadav @ Birmal

Yadav and Bucha Kumar @ Ravi Kumar respectively, be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Patna in Sigori PS Case No.

110 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 petitioners, (ii) that the petitioners and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioners, and (iii)

that the petitioners shall also give an undertaking to the Court that they 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 petitioners 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.

It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners, to the notice of the Court

concerned, which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

The petition stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.