Dhruplal Mukhia @ Dhrub Lal Mukhia v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68817 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-227 Year-2019 Thana- KURSAKANTA District- Araria ====================================================== DHRUPLAL MUKHIA @ DHRUB LAL MUKHIA Son of Late Kare Mukhiya Resident of Village - Maingara, Mehdipur, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Kursakanta, District - Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation against the petitioner is that he was arrested on spot with 12.600 litre of Nepali wine. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner is in custody since 07.09.2019 having no criminal antecedent. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below where the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68817 of 2019(2) dt.04-12-2019 2/2 case is pending in connection with Spl. Case No. 1174/2019, arising out of Kursakanta P. S. Case No. 227 of 2019 with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. (S. Kumar, J) Ranjeet/- U T