Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34398/2024bail granted

Ram Vinay Shah @ Ram Vinay Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-09Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34398 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2024 Thana- PATAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ram Vinay Shah @ Ram Vinay Sah Son of Fudena Shah Resident of Village - Kodariya, P.S. - Patahi, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anand Mohan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 39 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.

3. As per prosecution case, the police has recovered total 102 liter illegal Nepali liquor from a plastic carry-bag which was being carried by the petitioner as well as from the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34398 of 2024(2) dt.09-05-2024 2/2 He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the seized liquor. There is a noncompliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 08.03.2024 without any rhymes or reason.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as also taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner and the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Patahi P.S. Case No. 39 of 2024. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T