Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65031/2018bail granted

Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2018-11-05Mr. Justice S. Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.65031 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2018 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar, Son of Mahesh Prasad Yadav @ Mahesh Yadav, Resident of Village- Badroi, Police Station- Masaurhi, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Smt Sangeeta Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 05-11-2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Special Case No. 8267 of 2018 arising out of Punpun P.S. Case No. 243 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation against the petitioner is of recovery of 52 Litres of Mahua liquor from the motorcycle of the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 08.09.2018.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of 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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.65031 of 2018(2) dt.05-11-2018 2/2 amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Patna, in connection with Special Case No. 8267 of 2018 arising out of Punpun P.S. Case No. 243 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 represented on each and every date fixed by the court.

(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