Mahadeo Sah @ Mahadev Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.60799 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2018 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== MAHADEO SAH @ MAHADEV SAH son of Late Jai Karan Sah, resident of Village- Gopinathpur Dokara, P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajiv Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Satyadev Prasad Singh Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Saraiya P.S. Case No. 369 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a), 38 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation against the petitioner is of concealing 70.200 Litres of foreign liquor near the gali of Anganbari Kendra.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 25.08.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.60799 of 2018(2) dt.11-10-2018 2/2 the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Saraiya P.S. Case No. 369 of 2018, with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel his bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U