Vikash Kumar Baitha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.62971 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-244 Year-2018 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria ====================================================== Vikash Kumar Baitha, Son of Hari Baitha @ Hariya Baitha, Resident of Village- Training School, Ward 13, P.S.-Forbesganj, Dist.-Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 244 of 2018 corresponding to Special Case No. 1068 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 38(i) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation against petitioner is of recovery of 23.300 litres Nepali country made liquor from his possession. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 09.09.2018.

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.62971 of 2018(2) dt.12-10-2018 2/2 furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Araria, in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 244 of 2018 corresponding to Special Case No. 1068 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-

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

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner 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 petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) veena/- U T