Shankar Harijan And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24338 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -62 Year- 2017 Thana -RAJAULI District- NAWADA ======================================================

1. Shankar Harijan Son of Baleshwar Harijan.

2. Awalesh Chaudhary Son of Late Dwarik Chaudhary. Both resident of Village- Bhaiji Bhitta, P.S. Rajauli, District- Nawada.

3. Arun Ravidas Son of Rajendra Ravidas, Resident of Village- Barsot, P.S. Sirdala, District-Nawada.

.... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are in custody since 27.03.2017 in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 62 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in connection with the alleged recovery of 55 litres of country made Mahua wine. Recovery of the offending goods from the possession of the petitioners is denied. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody since 27.03.2017 already suffered, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 62 of 2017 with the following

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24338 of 2017 (3) dt.06-07-2017 2/2 conditions:

(i) That one of the bailors of each of the petitioners shall be their close relatives other than the petitioners herein. (ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) The petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) That the petitioners 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, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Ibrar U T