Ranjit Yadav @ Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22629 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2022 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

RANJIT YADAV @ RANJIT KUMAR @ RANJIT KUMAR YADAV Son of Ram Pyare Yadav, 2.

Sunil Kumar Son of Kapil Yadav, Both Resident of Village - Jharha, Police Station - Mahkar, District - Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Sharda Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-07-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 21/2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

As per prosecution case, there is alleged recovery of total 90 liters country made illegal wine from the motorcycle in question and the petitioners were apprehended on the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22629 of 2022(2) dt.29-07-2022 2/3 petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. He further submits that as per FIR itself that at the time of alleged search, the petitioners had no any knowledge about keeping of the alleged country made wine nearby their motorcycle but have falsely been implicated on suspicion. The petitioners are languishing in custody since 30.01.2022 and bear no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, charge sheet has already been submitted and keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioners and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Excise Court No.1, Gaya in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 21/2022, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22629 of 2022(2) dt.29-07-2022 3/3 or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

(ii) Petitioners will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial Court itself. (iii) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) amitkumar/- U T