Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45187/2017bail granted

Sudama Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-18Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45187 of 2017 (2) dt.18-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45187 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -299 Year- 2017 Thana -SHEKHPURA District- SEKHPURA ====================================================== Sudama Ram, Son of Late Lakhan Ram, resident of Village - Bazitpur, P.S. and Dist - Sheikhpura.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dr. Anjani Pd. Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Murlidhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Excise Case No. 611 of 2017, arising out of Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 299 of 2017 registered for offences punishable under Sections 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Allegation is of recovery of 16 litres of country made liquor.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody for one and half months.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, quantity of recovery and period of custody and also that petitioner has no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45187 of 2017 (2) dt.18-09-2017 criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhpura, in connection with Excise Case No. 611 of 2017, arising out of Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 299 of 2017.

(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.

(ii) It is made clear that if the petitioner again found involved in any of the like offences, in future, prosecution will be free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T