Himesh Kumar Poddar @ Hitesh Kumar Poddar @ Hitesh Poddar @ Golu Kumar @ Golu Kumar Poddar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.73407 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-630 Year-2018 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia ====================================================== Himesh Kumar Poddar @ Hitesh Kumar Poddar @ Hitesh Poddar @ Golu Kumar @ Golu Kumar Poddar, S/o Sharwan Poddar @ Sharwan Kumar Poddar, R/o Village- Rambagh, Lal Chhouni, Professor Colony, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Sah @ Baranwal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sri Parmanand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-12-2018 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 630 of 2018, registered for offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) and 38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation is of recovery of 38 and odd litres of liquor from the possession of the petitioner. Apart from that he is accused in two other cases, out of which, one is under Excise Act.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has falsely been implicated in this case and in fact nothing has been recovered from the petitioner and he has been in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.73407 of 2018(2) dt.13-12-2018 2/2 judicial custody since 29.10.2018. It has been also been submitted that so far criminal antecedent of the petitioner is concerned, he is on bail in both the cases.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances as well as the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, at this stage, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail rather the trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial within a period of four months and if the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T