Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19394 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2018 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar Singh @ Mukesh Singh, Son of Late Shiv Kumar Singh, Resident of Village- Sonupur, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 24-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.02.2018 in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 55 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), (d), 38 and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution case, as lodged by the police personnel, is that on secret information that huge quantity of foreign liquor is in the possession of the petitioner, police conducted a raid in the house of the petitioner but as he was not available in the house, police went to the orchard of one Pandit Ji where one Bolero car was found parked and huge consignment of foreign liquor was found unloaded and some loaded in the car which came to 267 litres. Petitioner along with

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19394 of 2018(2) dt.24-04-2018 2/3 other co-accused was apprehended who disclosed the name of other persons who had escaped. Accordingly, seizure list was prepared.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, bears no criminal antecedent as stated by the petitioner in paragraph 3 of his application and that he has been falsely implicated just because Bolero car belongs to him. He submits that large number of persons were apprehended and even the place of seizure was the orchard and not his house. He submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the petitioner.

However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let the petitioner, named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, Excise Act, Samastipur in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 55 of 2018, subject to the conditions that:

(1) One of the bailors would be close

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19394 of 2018(2) dt.24-04-2018 3/3 relative of the petitioner having sufficient immovable properties, who will file an affidavit stating his relationship with the petitioner.

(2) It is also made clear that if, in future, petitioner indulges in an offence of similar nature, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the learned Court below for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/Ragini U T