Ranjay Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14312 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2022 Thana- AMNAUR District- Saran ====================================================== RANJAY KUMAR RAI Son of Rajendra Rai Resident of Village - Mura, P.s.- Amnour, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-06-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. Petitioner, who is in custody since 28.01.2022, seeks regular bail in connection with Amnour P.S. Case No. 22 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
As per the allegation made in the FIR, altogether 99.5 litres of country-made liquor was recovered from the house of the petitioner.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is not involved either in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14312 of 2022(2) dt.15-06-2022 2/3 manufacturing of the liquor or its illicit sale in the State of Bihar. The alleged recovery has been made from the joint house of the petitioner. Petitioner was forced to sign the seizure list after he was taken into custody. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 28.01.2022. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He submits that the trade of illicit liquor is rampant in the State of Bihar. In spite of complete prohibition in the State, due to consumption of illicit liquor, people at large are dying everyday and they are suffering from various physical disorder, as such it would not be in public interest to release the petitioner on bail.
Considering the nature of allegation made in the FIR, the alleged recovery was effected from the joint house of the petitioner, petitioner was forced to put his signature on the seizure after he was taken into police custody, Petitioner has remained in custody since 28.01.2022 on mere suspicion and the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees One Lac) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Ist Exclusive Special Judge, Excise Saran at Chapra in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14312 of 2022(2) dt.15-06-2022 3/3 with Amnour P.S. Case No. 22 of 2022 subject to the following conditions:
(i) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.
(ii) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court. (iii) 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. (iv) 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 bond.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T