Patna High CourtCR. MISC./48762/2017bail granted

Dhurendra Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

2017-10-12Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.48762 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -253 Year- 2017 Thana -HARSIDHI DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ======================================================

1. Dhurendra Sahani, Son of Ramayan Sahani, Resident of VillageMurarpur, P.S.- Harsidhi, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 12-10-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Harisidhi P.S. Case No. 253 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Allegation is of recovery of 2200 litrs of raw spirit. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and has nothing to do with the seized spirit. Further he has not been arrested on spot and his name has been disclosed by the person, who arrested on spot. Further he has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 26.06.2017.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.48762 of 2017 (2) dt.12-10-2017 2/2 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 Special Judge, Excise, Motihari, East Champaran, in connection with Harisidhi P.S. Case No. 253 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