Shamim Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.57979 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -274 Year- 2018 Thana -GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN (MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. Shamim Ansari S/o Mokhtar Miya @ Mukhatar Ansari, R/o vill.- Inarwa Phulwar, P.S.- Lakhaura, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajkishore Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Excise Case No. 274 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 30 (A) of Bihar Prohibition of Excise Act, 2016. As per F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioner is of recovery of 30 bottle Nepali liquor, each containing 300 ml. from the possession of the petitioner along with other accused persons. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion and only nine liter Nepali liquor has been recovered from the possession of two persons, including the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 15.06.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.57979 of 2018 (2) dt.28-09-2018 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Excise, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Excise Case No. 274 of 2018, subject to the following conditions:- 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) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

iii) It is made clear that if petitioner found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T