Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4134/2017bail granted

Rajiv Uraon v. The State Of Bihar

2017-02-06Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4134 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -258 Year- 2016 Thana -GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. DistrictPURNIA ====================================================== Rajiv Uraon, son of Late Sukru Uraon, resident of Village- Basantpur, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 06-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Case CI No. 258 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 47(A) and 53(B) of the Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 having earlier been rejected by this Court by order dated 04.10.2016 in Criminal Misc. No. 41429 of 2016.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with recovery of country made Mahua wine etc.

4. It is reiterated that no recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner.

5. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody by the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4134 of 2017 (2) dt.06-02-2017 2/2 petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea, in connection with Case CI No. 258 of 2016 on the following conditions - (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.

(iv) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Vikash Jain, J) Amin/Ibrar U