Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45392/2017bail granted

Amar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-18Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45392 of 2017 (2) dt.18-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45392 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -96 Year- 2017 Thana -GANGABRIDGE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Amar Kumar, Son of Devendra Rai, Resident of Village- Lavapur Narain, Police Station- Mahnar, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Upendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gangabridge P.S. Case No. 96 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 10 bottles of foreign liquor. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 08.08.2017. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, quantity of recovery and period of custody and also that petitioner has no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, be released

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45392 of 2017 (2) dt.18-09-2017 on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- II- Cum Special Judge, Excise Act, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Gangabridge P.S. Case No. 96 of 2017.

(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.

(ii) It is made clear that if the petitioner again found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution will be free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T