Shatendra Sahni @ Shatendra Mukhia @ Satyendra Sahni @ Satender Sahni And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6598 of 2018 (2) dt.15-02-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.6598 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -C-2/743 Year- 2017 Thana -GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. SHATENDRA SAHNI @ SHATENDRA MUKHIA @ SATYENDRA SAHNI @ SATENDER SAHNI. S/o Sukeshwar Sahni @ Sukeshwar Mukhia.

2. UMESH SAHNI @ UMESH MUKHIA S/o Ganour Sahni, Both are R/o Village- Bagha, P.S.- Kanhauli, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shankar Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 15-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are in custody since 29.12.2017 in connection with Case No. C-2/743/17, District Sitamarhi for the alleged offences under Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in connection with alleged recovery of 13.5 litres of Nepali Saufi wine from their possession. The recovery of the alleged articles has been denied. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-IIcum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Sitamarhi in connection with Case

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6598 of 2018 (2) dt.15-02-2018 No. C-2/743/17 on the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioners.

(ii) That the petitioners shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

(iii) That the petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make themselves available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) That the petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/BT U T