Satish Saroha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33900 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -89 Year- 2018 Thana -MANJHI District- SARAN ====================================================== Satish Saroha Son of Hari Singh Resident of Village- Sisana, P.S. Kharkhoda, District- Sonipat, Haryana.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar -2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 23-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273, 188 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30, 30(a) and 38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

10080 litres of foreign liquor is said to have been recovered from a truck and the petitioner who happens to be its driver was apprehended.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner. He has no concern with the seized liquor. He happens to be driver of the truck in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33900 of 2018 (5) dt.23-07-2018 2/2 question and he had no knowledge of keeping of the aforesaid liquor in the truck. He has no criminal antecedent. He has been languishing in custody since 28.04.2018.

Learned APP vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that huge quantity of foreign liquor has been recovered from the truck and the petitioner happens to be driver of the said truck, so he had knowledge of keeping of the liquor in the truck. Hence, he does not deserve bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and S.P., Saran at Chapra is directed to ensure production of the witnesses in the case on each and every date fixed without fail.

Let a copy of this order be communicated to S.P., Saran at Chapra by fax for needful.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) Mishra/- U T