Anil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.61954 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -141 Year- 2018 Thana -GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. DistrictBUXAR ======================================================

1. Anil Kumar Singh S/o Ajay Kumar Singh, R/o Vill.- Mahdah, P.S.- Buxar (Muffasil), District- Buxar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyapal Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmala Kumari, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Case No. 141(O) of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (Amended Act 2018).

Allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is of recovery of 374.40 liters of English Wine from the Pick-up Van and the petitioner was arrested on the spot.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and nothing has been recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that the petitioner is only driver of the vehicle and he

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.61954 of 2018 (2) dt.11-10-2018 2/2 has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 24.08.2018. Heard learned A.P.P also.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rupees Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ADJ-II-cum- Special Judge (Excise), Buxar in Case no. 141(O) of 2018, subject to the following conditions:- 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) The petitioner will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

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

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