Golu Singh @ Mukesh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3018 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2020 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== Golu Singh @ Mukesh S/o Paras Singh R/o village- Terha, P.S.- Isuapur, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anant Kumar Bhaskar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-06-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30/30A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Allegedly, 500 litres of spirit was recovered from an orchard and the petitioner is alleged to be indulged in the illicit business of manufacturing of wine.

The main submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner are that in this case three co-accused persons namely Alok Pandey @ Alok Kumar Pandey, Arun Manjhi @ Arun Kumar Manjhi @ Arun Kumar and Jay Mangal Manjhi carrying similar nature of allegation have been granted bail by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3018 of 2022(2) dt.20-06-2022 2/2 this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 33465 of 2021, 9713 of 2020 , 22789 of 2020 and 14345 of 2020 and petitioner has been languishing in jail since 10.09.2021 in this case and the alleged place of recovery does not belong to the petitioner. Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

Heard both the sides and perused the FIR. Allegedly this petitioner and other co-accused persons were indulged in the manufacturing of illicit wine and from the place of recovery which is stated to be an orchared 500 literes of spirit was recovered. Though some co-accused carrying similar nature of allegation are on bail granted by this Court vide order passed in above mentioned Cr. Misc. but considering a long criminal history of the petitioner mentioned in para 3 of the petition which shows six criminal cases lodged under Excise Act being pending against the petitioner in my view at this stage petitioner does not deserve regular bail.

Accordingly, his prayer for regular bail stands rejected. Petitioner may renew his bail prayer after framing of charge in this case.

siddharthkr/- (Shailendra Singh, J) U T