Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45968/2017bail granted

Jangali Yadav @ Akhilesh Yadav And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-19Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45968 of 2017 (2) dt.19-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45968 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -356 Year- 2017 Thana -SUPAUL District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Jangali Yadav @ Akhilesh Yadav Son of Narayan Yadav resident of Gauravgarh, P.S. Supaul, District - Supaul.

2. Mukesh Yadav Son of Hiralal Yadav resident of Gauravgarh, P.S. Supaul, District - Supaul.

.... .... Petitioners/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioners/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Sri Uday Chand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2017 The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 356 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 112 litres of country made liquor.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have falsely been implicated in this case and have no criminal antecedent and have been in judicial custody since 24.06.2017. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation period of custody

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45968 of 2017 (2) dt.19-09-2017 and also that petitioners have no criminal antecedent, let the petitioners above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.D.J. - IInd, Supaul, in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 356 of 2017.

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

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

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