Arvind Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64152 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2021 Thana- SINGHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== ARVIND YADAV Son of Sita Ram Yadav Resident of Village - Paikara, P.s.- Singhiya, Distt.- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raja Ram Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Madan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-05-2022 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 114 of 2021, for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The allegation is recovery of 42.375 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor of different brands from husk house situated in front of the house of petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. He has no concern either

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64152 of 2021(2) dt.09-05-2022 2/3 with the manufacturing of liquor or its trade in any manner. The petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody since 19.08.2021.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He further submits that trade of illicit liquor is rampant in the State of Bihar and often hooch tragedy is being occurred due to consumption of illicit liquor by the people at large and as such petitioner is involved in heinous crime and he does not deserve to be released on bail. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case and period of custody undergone by the petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J-II-cum-Special Judge (Excise), Samastipur in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 114 of 2021, subject to the 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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64152 of 2021(2) dt.09-05-2022 3/3

(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.

(4) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.

(Purnendu Singh, J) manish/- U T