Ritlal Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19939 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2020 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ritlal Sahani, Aged about 40 years, Male, Son of Kamleshwar Sahani, Resident of Village Chintamanipur, P.S. Vaishali, District Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. B.N. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2020 Heard Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. B.N. Pandey, the learned Additional P.P.

The petitioner seeks bail in Bochahan P.S. Case No.61 of 2020, registered under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 30(a) and 32(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and Prakash Kumar were apprehended on the allegation that they were carrying a truck bearing Registration No.RJ05GA-2727. Petitioner is the driver of the vehicle and Prakash Kumar disclosed that he is the cleaner of the vehicle. It is submitted that 2172 litres of beer and 1341 litres of Indian made foreign liquor was recovered from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19939 of 2020(3) dt.18-08-2020 2/2 the truck. The petitioner disclosed the names of the persons at whose instance the consignment was carried. The petitioner is in jail since 27.02.2020. Prakash Kumar, the cleaner of the truck has already been enlarged on bail. The petitioner also deserves bail, but it appears that it was the petitioner who was the driver of the vehicle and it was he who was carrying huge quantity of beer and Indian made foreign liquor.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

The petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after remaining one year in custody.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T