Niraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.460 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-724 Year-2023 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Niraj Kumar Son Of Rampravesh Ray Resident Of Village- Madhopur, PsMahua, Distt- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 16-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 414, 420/34 of the IPC and Sections 30(a), 32(ii), 34(ii) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per prosecution case, there has been recovery of total 4205.52 liters of illegal liquor from different vehicles.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that the petitioner has no concern either with the seized vehicles or with the wine in question. He submitted that petitioner is a labour and he was called for unloading the truck without giving knowledge that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.460 of 2024(2) dt.16-01-2024 2/2 liquor is loaded in the truck. On the basis of suspicion, petitioner has been implicated in the present case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The provision of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. has not been followed in this case, while preparing the seizure list. He is languishing in judicial custody since 08.11.2023.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to 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 Exclusive Special Prohibition and Excise Court-2-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 724 of 2023.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Arish/- U T