Statement by the accused do not form strong grounds for apprehending arrest of the Petitioner: High Court Of Patna

The Petitioner was apprehended arrest and was alleged to have delivered a trolley full of liquor by the accused. On investigation and considering the facts and circumstances the court found that the allegation was based on the statement of the accused only. The Court cannot rely on a mere statement by the accused and hence granted the bail. The Hon’ble High Court of Patna before Justice Mr. Ahsanuddin Amanullah in the matter Amit Kumar v. The State of Bihar[Criminal Miscellaneous No.2051 of 2021]. 

The facts of the case were that the petitioner was apprehended arrest in connection with the Case, instituted under Sections 273/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. It was alleged that the petitioner was liable for delivering the liquor to the one caught by the police. It was alleged that the petitioner came to receive the trolley full of liquor but when he saw police, he hid away.

The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accusations are false and bald. The one arrested by the police was an employee under the petitioner and due to his negligence towards his duty, he had been warned by the petitioner. To take revenge the accused had taken the petitioner’s name and has been falsely implicated. It was further submitted that the petitioner had no other criminal antecedent.

The Hon’ble High Court of Patna held,” Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court finds that the allegation against the petitioner is based only on the statement of the arrested co-accused that the liquor was to be delivered to him, the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act would not apply and further, since the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent, the Court is inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for pre-arrest bail.” It was further added,” 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.” The Petition was hence disposed on the said terms.

Click Here To Read The Judgment

Judgment Reviewed By Nimisha Dublish

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat