Krishna Mahto @ Hui Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15261 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2022 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Saran ====================================================== KRISHNA MAHTO @ HUI MAHTO Son of Ramjee Mahto Resident of Village- Hassanpurwa, P.S.- Chapra Mufassil, District- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-06-2022 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 20.01.2022, seeks regular bail in connection with Saran Excise Case No. 22 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

As per the allegation made in the FIR, 15.500 litres of country-made liquor was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has been dragged in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15261 of 2022(2) dt.16-06-2022 2/2 the present case because several criminal cases are pending against him. Petitioner has remained in custody since 20.01.2022.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He has referred to paragraph no. 3 of the bail application where altogether seven cases are pending against the petitioner. He further submits that it would not be in the interest of public at large to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioner as well as the number of criminal cases pending against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

The petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after the period of twelve months.

Accordingly, the present bail application is disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T