Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26292/2017bail granted

Niranjan Kumar Mehta v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-06Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26292 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -211 Year- 2017 Thana -SHERGHATI District- GAYA ====================================================== Niranjan Kumar Mehta Son of Kashi Prasad Mehta, Resident of VillageGunja, P.S. Ichak, District- Hazaribag (Jharkhand). .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 25.04.2017 in connection with Sherghati (Dobhi) P.S. Case No. 211 of 2017 for the offences alleged under Sections 30(a) and 33 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with the alleged recovery of 350 litres of un-refined spirit from Safari vehicle. Recovery of the offending goods from the possession of the petitioner is denied. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody since 25.04.2017 already suffered, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise Act, Gaya in connection with Sherghati (Dobhi) P.S. Case No. 211 of 2017 with the following conditions:

(i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26292 of 2017 (2) dt.06-07-2017 2/2 petitioner.

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

(iii) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself 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 petitioner 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, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (Vikash Jain, J) B.T/Ibrar U T