Patna High CourtCR. MISC./41439/2016bail granted

Sanjay Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

2016-10-04Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41439 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No. -43 Year- 2016 Thana -GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. DistrictSASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Sanjay Mehta, Son of late Radheshyam Mehta, Resident of Mohalla - Lakhanu Sarai, P.S. Sasaram (Town), District Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party: APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 04-10-2016 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 05.08.2016 in connection with Excise Case No. 43 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Section 47(a) of the Excise Act.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and he was not arrested from the spot nor any recovery has been made from his conscious possession. The petitioner has been implicated under misimpression that he is the owner of the vehicle in question whereas, according to the prosecution report itself, the name of the owner of the vehicle is Pankaj Kumar.

4. Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dehri, District-Rohtas in connection with Excise Case No. 43 of 2016 with the following conditions:

(i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41439 of 2016 (2) dt.04-10-2016 2/2 petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Ibrar U T