Rajendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74874 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-374 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rajendra Mahto Son of Amol Mahto @ Amola Mahto Resident of VillChhatauni Saranarthi Colony, P.S.-Chhatauni, Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 22-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 374 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the police has recovered total 60.6 litres illicit Nepali liquor from Tempo bearing Regd. No. BR-05PB-2326.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is the driver-cum-owner of the Tempo in question. The petitioner has no concern with the seized liquor. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74874 of 2024(2) dt.22-10-2024 2/2 petitioner was not aware of the contents of the material loaded in the alleged Tempo. There is a non-compliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 19.08.2024 without any rhymes or reason.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as also taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner and the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 374 of 2024. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T