Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45183/2017bail granted

Shatya Narain Baitha v. The State Of Bihar

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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45183 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45183 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -195 Year- 2017 Thana -BARGANIA District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Shatya Narain Baitha, S/o Late Ram Nandan Baitha, Resident of Village- Sangram Fandah, P.S.- Riga, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Shyam Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 195 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(A) and 37(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 120 piece of nepali saufi liquor each containing 300 ML. total 36 litres. 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 28.07.2017 Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, quantity of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45183 of 2017 (2) dt.15-09-2017 recovery and period of custody and also that petitioner has no criminal antecedent, 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 I/C A.D.J.-II-Cum Special Judge, Excise Act, Sitamarhi, in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 195 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