Ranjit Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24777 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2021 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== RANJIT SAH S/O MURLIDHAR SAH R/O Village- Telaunda Ekchari, P.SSanokhar, Distt.- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ambrish Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Parmeshwar Mehta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 22-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

As per allegation in the FIR, 39.70 quintal of rice was recovered from a pickup van bearing registration no. BR10GB2234 and petitioner is owner of the said vehicle. It is further alleged that apprehended accused persons could not show the valid papers regarding transportation of the alleged grains. There is suspicion that someone has intentionally removed the mark and seal from the sack for the purpose of black marketing.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24777 of 2023(2) dt.22-05-2023 2/2 is registered owner of this commercial vehicle and he ahs no concern with the seized food grains. No one is the claimant of the alleged recovered rice. Neither the petitioner nor any of his family members is a PDS dealer so there is no question of black marketing. Similarly situated other accused person has already been enlarged on bail by another coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.7.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22316 of 2022. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 30.11.2022.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, Bhagalpur in connection with Pirpainty P.S. Case No. 202 of 2021.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U