Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45615/2017bail granted

Manoj Kumar Sahni @ Manoj Sahni And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-19Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45615 of 2017 (2) dt.19-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45615 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -128 Year- 2017 Thana -KURSELA District- KATIHAR ======================================================

1. Manoj Kumar Sahni @ Manoj Sahni

2. Pradum Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Rahmatullah For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 128 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Allegation is of recovery of 35 litres of country made liquor.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that they have falsely been implicated in this case and have no criminal antecedent and moreover they have sufficiently been punished for the said offence as they have custody since 14.08.2017. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, quantity of recovery and period of custody and also that petitioner has no

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45615 of 2017 (2) dt.19-09-2017 criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.D.J. -II -Cum - Special Judge, Excise Act, Katihar, in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 128 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 their bail bonds.

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