Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62969/2018bail granted

Kunti Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2018-10-12Mr. Justice S. Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62969 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2018 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Gaya ======================================================

1. Kunti Devi Wife of Arjun Manjhi.

2. Rajendra Manjhi, Son of Late Karu Manjhi Both Resident of Village- Ramdih Bhuian Toli, P.S. Paraiya, District Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Murlidhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioners seek bail in Excise P.S. Case No. 143 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) (d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Allegation against petitioner no.1 is recovery of 60 Kg Mahua and allegation against petitioner no. 2 is of recovery of 9 Litres of Mahua wine and 165 Kg of formulated Mahua. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioners have got no criminal antecedent and are in custody since 17.08.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.62969 of 2018(2) dt.12-10-2018 2/2 furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Gaya, in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 143 of 2018 with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel their bail bonds.

(3) If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U