Niraj@Niraj Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar

Facts

The petitioner, Niraj@Niraj Kumar, sought regular bail in connection with Jagadishpur P.S. Case No. 531 of 2021, for offences including those under the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018. The prosecution alleged the recovery of 666 litres of foreign liquor from a truck. The petitioner claimed to be a Khalasi (helper) on the truck, which he stated belonged to one Deepak. He asserted he was unaware of the liquor being loaded, as the truck was ostensibly carrying GST goods for delivery. The petitioner has been in custody since December 20, 2021, and has a clean antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted.

Held

The Court granted bail to the petitioner. The Court considered that the petitioner was a Khalasi and the specific allegations were primarily against the owner of the truck. It was noted that the petitioner had a clean antecedent and had been in custody since December 20, 2021, with the charge sheet already submitted. The Court found these factors sufficient to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The ratio decidendi is that a mere helper on a vehicle, with no prior record and unaware of the illicit cargo, may be granted bail, especially when the primary responsibility appears to lie with the owner of the vehicle and the investigation is complete. The petitioner was directed to furnish bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions including cooperation in the trial and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, as a Khalasi, can be held liable for the illegal liquor found loaded on the truck, given his alleged lack of knowledge and the truck owner being the primary target of allegations? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that he was merely a Khalasi and unaware of the liquor being transported. He contended that the truck was used under the guise of delivering GST goods, and the specific allegation was against the truck's owner. He highlighted his clean antecedent and the duration of his custody since December 20, 2021. Revenue/State's Argument: The State opposed the prayer for bail, without elaborating specific arguments beyond the general opposition to the bail application.