Md. Akhtar Raza @ Akhtar Raza @ Md. Akhtar … vs The State Of Bihar on 15 April, 2026

    0
    53
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Md. Akhtar Raza @ Akhtar Raza @ Md. Akhtar … vs The State Of Bihar on 15 April, 2026

    Author: Satyavrat Verma

    Bench: Satyavrat Verma

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12111 of 2026
                             Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2019 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia
                     ======================================================
                     Md. Akhtar Raza @ Akhtar Raza @ Md. Akhtar Reza S/o Md. Khurshid
                     Alam @ Khursed Alam R/o Village- Farsara, Dalkohla, P.S- Dalkohla, Dist-
                     Uttar Dinajpur, West Bengal.
    
                                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                            Versus
                     The State of Bihar
    
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Nafisu Zzoha
                     For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Akbar Ali
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    2   15-04-2026

    1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

    A.P.P. for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

    registered for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273 of

    the IPC and Sections 30(a), 33, 41 and 47 of Bihar Prohibition

    and Excise Act, 2016.

    3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

    petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the Excise Act and

    allegation is of recovery of 8000 litres of spirit from two trucks.

    It is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot

    as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession

    and is not the owner of any of the seized vehicle and he came to

    be implicated based on confessional statement of Murshid in
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12111 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
    2/3

    police custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is

    also submitted that after amendment in the Excise Act in the

    year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed

    offender has been done away with. It is also submitted that once

    an accused is implicated in a case relating to excise, the police

    starts implicating mechanically either through chowkidar, local

    person, confessional statement or secret information without

    holding a proper investigation.

    4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

    anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

    5. Considering the submissions made by the learned

    counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

    event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

    from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on

    furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with

    two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

    learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in

    connection with Baisi P.S. Case No.238/2019, subject to the

    conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

    6. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter

    shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

    event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of more than
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12111 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
    3/3

    two cases, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner

    had concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

    provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

    on verification it is found that petitioner has antecedent of two

    cases, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order shall

    be confirmed forthwith.

    (Satyavrat Verma, J)
    amit/-

    U        T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here