Patna High CourtCR. MISC./54987/2017bail granted

Pramod Kumar Verma @ Pappu v. The State Of Bihar

2017-11-17Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54987 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -125 Year- 2017 Thana -JALE District- DARBHANGA ======================================================

1. Pramod Kumar Verma @ Pappu, Son of Harish Chandra Prasad, Resident of Village- Rarhi, Police Station- Jalley, District- Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No-2 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-11-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with G.O. Excise Case No. 1444 of 2017 arising out of Jalley P.S. Case No. 125 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 188/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 19 litres of 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 22.08.2017. 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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54987 of 2017 (2) dt.17-11-2017 2/2 criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, be released 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 4th Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Darbhanga, Bihar, in connection with G.O. Excise Case No. 1444 of 2017, arising out of Jalley P.S. Case No. 125 of 2017, subject to the condition that:- (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