Patna High CourtCR. MISC./43723/2017bail granted

Amardeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-20Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43723 of 2017 (2) dt.20-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43723 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -27 Year- 2017 Thana -SIMULTALA District- JAMUI ======================================================

1. Amardeep Kumar, Son of Umesh Ram, Resident of Village- Nandnama, Police Station- Ramgarh Chowk in the district of Lakhisarai. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Arun Kumar Singh -5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Simultalla P.S. Case No. 27 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a), 41 and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 80 litres of foreign liquor. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and petitioner is a driver of the vehicle from which alleged recovery was made. Further he has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 31.07.2017 Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43723 of 2017 (2) dt.20-09-2017 circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, quantity of recovery and period of custody and also that petitioner has no 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 02nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamui, in connection with Simultalla P.S. Case No. 27 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