Patna High CourtCR. MISC./43724/2017bail granted

Raju Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-09-20Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43724 of 2017 (2) dt.20-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.43724 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -179 Year- 2017 Thana -RAJIVNAGAR District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Raju Kumar, Son of Suba Paswan, Resident of Mohalla- Chitkohra, Road No.28, Railway Line Ke Kinare, P.S.- Gardanibagh, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 20-09-2017 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rajiv Nagar P.S. Case No. 179 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 30(A) /37(A) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 400 litres of toddy. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and he was only a passenger in the tempo from which alleged recovery was made. Further he has no criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 18.07.2017.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43724 of 2017 (2) dt.20-09-2017 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 Special Judge, Excise, Patna, in connection with Rajiv Nagar P.S. Case No. 179 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