Bhim Singh @ Rakesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

(FROM OFFICIAL CHAMBERS VIA VIDEO APPLICATION) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28420 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2019 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== BHIM SINGH @ RAKESH SINGH, Son of Mukur Singh, Resident of Village - Nayaka Barka Baiju Tola, P.S. - Rivilganj, District - Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 22-10-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove all the defects as pointed out by office within four weeks after start of normal functioning of the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 343 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 188, 272, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30, 38, 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He is in custody since 11.01.2021. Petitioner has got nine criminal antecedents as stated in paragraph '3' of the application. As per the prosecution story, on secret information while the informant was involved in vehicle checking intercepted a car and recovered 63 litres of country made wine from the vehicle in question. The driver of the vehicle on interrogation disclosed the name of the petitioner and others to be involved in supply of liquor.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28420 of 2021(2) dt.22-10-2021 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the vehicle in question and his name has been disclosed by the apprehended driver for which he is in custody since 11.01.2021.

Mr. Akhileshwar Dayal, learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner is accused in nine cases and out of which four cases of similar nature.

Having regard to the kind of criminal antecedents of the petitioner which includes four cases of similar nature and this being fifth case in a row, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage.

Let the trial be expedited.

If the trial remains unconcluded for no reason attributable to the petitioner within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order, he may renew his prayer for bail. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) vats/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.