Raghu Poddar vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Raghu Poddar, is seeking regular bail in connection with Panjwara P.S. Case No. 109 of 2020, for offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The case involves the recovery of 335 bottles of Indian Made Foreign Liquor from an unnumbered tempo. During the investigation, co-accused Rakesh Kumar Gupta and Vishnu Paswan stated that the petitioner had directed them to deliver the seized liquor. The tempo was registered in the name of Guriya Devi, not the petitioner. The petitioner has been in custody since February 9, 2021, and argues he is innocent, falsely implicated, and nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. He also highlights his release on bail in several other prior cases.
Held
The Court directed the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Banka, to obtain a report from the Incharge Officer, Commercial Taxes, Banka, regarding whether the petitioner is a registered dealer under the GST Act, 2017, for taxable goods and is not involved in clandestine trade. Pending this report, the petitioner was enlarged on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties. The bail is subject to conditions including regular attendance at the police station, cooperation in the trial, and a warning against tampering with evidence or witnesses. The Court also stipulated that if the petitioner is found involved in similar offences after release, his bail bonds may be cancelled. The Court did not decide on the merits of the excise case itself, but rather on the bail application, contingent on a GST-related inquiry.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail in Panjwara P.S. Case No. 109 of 2020, considering his alleged involvement in the illicit trade of liquor based on the statements of co-accused and the recovery from a vehicle not registered in his name, as per Section 30(a) and 32 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contends he is innocent, falsely implicated, and nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. He argues his implication is solely based on the confessional statements of co-accused, and the vehicle involved does not belong to him. He also points to his prior release on bail in other cases. Revenue/State's arguments: The State opposes the bail prayer, submitting that sufficient material exists in the case diary against the petitioner, and his involvement in the illicit liquor trade cannot be ruled out.
Sections Cited
Section 30(a), Section 32, GST Act, 2017
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER 6 03-02-2022 Heard the parties through video conferencing. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. The petitioner, who is in custody since 09.02.2021, seeks regular bail in connection with Panjwara P.S. Case No. 109 of 2020, corresponding to Special Excise Case No. 738 of 2020, for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) and 32 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution case, in brief, altogether 335 bottles of Indian Made Foreign Liquor total 125.625 litres were recovered from the tempo running without number plate. In the course of investigation it surfaced that the alleged tempo is 2/4 registered in the name of Guriya Devi, wife of Anil Singh, which was driven by one Rakesh Kumar Gupta, who had accompanied one co-accused Vishnu Paswan, both the accused have revealed that the present petitioner had directed them to deliver the seized liquor at the required place and destination. Accordingly, the seizure list was prepared. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that nothing was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he has been roped in the present case on the basis of confessional statement of Rakesh Kumar Gupta and Vishnu Paswan, who were apprehended at the time of seizure of the alleged vehicle. The alleged vehicle does not belong to the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 09.02.2021. He further submits that in paragraph No.3 of the bail application, he has given details of other cases pending against the petitioner in which he has been released on bail are as follows: (1) Amarpur P.S. Case No. 508 of 2016, (2) Amarpur P.S. Case No. 403 of 2017, (3) Amarpur P.S. Case No. 165 of 202 and (4) Amarpur P.S. Case No. 75 of 2017 Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for 3/4 grant of bail to the petitioner. He further submits that sufficient material has come in the case diary against the petitioner and the involvement of the petitioner in illicit trade of liquor cannot be ruled out. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, the Court below is directed to obtain report from the Incharge Officer, Commercial Taxes, Banka having juri iction as to whether the present petitioner is registered dealer under the provisions of GST Act, 2017 relating to certain taxable goods under the GST Act and is not involved in carrying any trade in clandestine manner, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Banka in connection with Panjwara P.S. Case No. 109 of 2020, corresponding to Special Excise Case No. 738 of 2020, subject to the condition that the petitioner will make his attendance before the S.H.O. of the concerned Police Station on every Tue ay of the week at 9.00 A.M and the S.H.O is required to send attendance of the petitioner, on monthly basis, to the concerned Superintendent of Police till the conclusion of the trial, if there is even a single day default, the bail bonds of 4/4 the petitioner shall, automatically, be cancelled as well as subject to the following conditions:- (1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the juri iction of the Court concerned. (2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court. (3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (4) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.
manish/- (Purnendu Singh, J) U T
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.