Suleman Yadav @ Vijay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18738 of 2017 (2) dt.16-05-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18738 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -8 Year- 2017 Thana -BEGUSARAI GRP CASE District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== Suleman Yadav @ Vijay Yadav, Son of Chandra Shekhar Yadav, resident of Village- Kasha, P.S. Barauni (Chakia), District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar-1 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Asha Devi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barauni Rail P.S. Case No. 8 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30 (A) of Bihar Excise Amendment Act.

Allegedly, from the bag of the petitioner 80 pieces spicy liquor each containing 200 ml. and 40 pieces of country made liquor each containing 200 ml. were recovered and the petitioner confessed that he used to sale the liquor after bringing the same from Jharkhand.

Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent, he is suffering in custody since 10.01.2017 and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18738 of 2017 (2) dt.16-05-2017 Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the period of detention, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Railway Judicial Magistrate, Barauni in connection with Barauni Rail P.S. Case No. 08 of 2017, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T