Ranju Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39804 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2021 Thana- AKBARPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== Ranju Yadav Son of Jagdish Yadav Resident of Village - Nanubigha, Police Station - Akbarpur, District - Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Man Mohan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Suman Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-10-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable punishable under Section 30(a)(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. 600 litres of soaked raisin solution has been recovered from the field of Ranju Yadav.

It is submitted that no recovery has been made from conscious possession of this petitioner. The said field does not belong to this petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 24.03.2021.

Considering the period of custody, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39804 of 2021(2) dt.05-10-2021 2/2 like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge II-cum-Special Judge Excise Act, Nawada in connection with Akbarpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2021, subject to following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the court below. (ii) 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. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T