Bauye Lal Mahto @ Bauelal Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75249 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2019 Thana- NOWKOTHI GARHPURA District- Begusarai ====================================================== BAUYE LAL MAHTO @ BAUELAL MAHTO Son of Late Ram Swarup Mahto Resident of Village- Ward No.10, Bhagat Tola, Samsa, P.S.- Nawkothi, District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 26-11-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 12.09.2019 in connection with Nawkothi P.S. Case No. 107 of 2019 for the offences alleged under Sections 420, 272, 273, 274, 275, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(A) of Bihar Excise Act, 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated merely because he happens to be the owner of the house, from one of the rooms of which 146 litres of foreign liquor is said to have been recovered. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, let the petitioner above named be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75249 of 2019(2) dt.26-11-2019 2/2 released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-IIcum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Begusarai, in connection with Nawkothi P.S. Case No. 107 of 2019, on the following conditions- (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial. (iii) That the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make himself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) That the petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T