Mukesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.74351 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-463 Year-2018 Thana- GAYA KOTWALI District- Gaya ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar, Son of Rohan Yadav, Resident of Village- Ketariwar is also known as Ketariwag, P.S.- Hunterganj, District- Chatra (Jharkhant) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kiran Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramesh Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 13-12-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kotwali (Gaya) P.S. Case No. 463 of 2018 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 30(a) of Bihar Excise Prohibition Act, 2016. In the written report, it is alleged that police during checking of vehicles saw one pick up van on which Sudha dairy was written was coming very fast. Having seen the police party the driver of the vehicle tried to turn the vehicle fast on crossing as a result vehicle turned down. The petitioner and khalasi of the vehicle were apprehended by the police. The police found 2330 litres of country made liquor loaded on the aforesaid vehicle. The petitioner disclosed that he was bringing those foreign liquor from Jharkhand which belonged to one

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.74351 of 2018(2) dt.13-12-2018 2/2 Bablu Sau.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that said Babul Sau has already been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Bench of this court by order dated 26.11.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. no 69352 of 2018. This petitioner has been arrested on the spot with 2330 litres of country made liquor loaded on the vehicle. Petitioner was driver of the said vehicle. Keeping in view the recovery of huge quantity of illicit liquor from vehicle, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The prayer for bail of petitioner stands rejected.

Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and make efforts to conclude the same as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order..

Petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months in the event no substantial progress is made in the case. (Sanjay Priya, J) shyambihari/- U T