Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45100/2017bail granted

Kun Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-15Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45100 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45100 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -340 Year- 2017 Thana -BARACHATTI District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Kun Chaudhary Son of Tetar Chaudhary, resident of Village- Gajragarh, Police Station- Barachatti, District- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tej Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Parmanand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 340 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(A), 38 and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 40 litres of mahua liquor along with huge quantity of unprepared mahua. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 11.07.2017 and though he is an accused in one more case of similar nature but that is of the year 2006.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45100 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 Having heard both sides, in view of the above facts, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Gaya, in connection with Barachatti P.S. Case No. 340 of 2017.

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

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