Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57368/2023bail rejected

Devnath Prajapati v. The State Of Bihar

2023-09-22Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57368 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2022 Thana- KOCHADHAMAN District- Kishanganj ====================================================== 1.

DEVNATH PRAJAPATI S/o Harihar Prajapati R/o Village-Golhana, P.S.- Pandawa, District-Palamu, Jharkhand 2.

SITTU RAM S/o Guddi Ram Village-Shakhua, P.S.-Pandawa, DistrictPalamu, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rita Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-09-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Kochadhaman P.S. Case No. 152 of 2022, dated 23.06.2022 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a), 31, 32, 36 and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. This is second attempt of the petitioners for the relief of regular bail after their earlier prayer was rejected by this Bench vide order dated 15.02.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 47148 of 2022 preferred by these petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57368 of 2023(3) dt.22-09-2023 2/2

4. The main submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners are that both the petitioners have been languishing in jail since 24.06.2022 having fair and clean antecedent and they were driver and co-driver of the alleged vehicle from which alleged recovery of liquor was made.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the Status Report of petitioners' case sent by the Trial Court, which goes to show that petitioners' case is at final stage and running for pronouncement of the judgment, in my opinion, it will not be proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail at this stage. Accordingly, petitioners' prayer for bail again stands rejected.

(Shailendra Singh, J.) Maynaz/- U T