Allowed

Bhoril Kamat v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC10 May 2018CR. MISC./27856/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court ordered the enlargement of the petitioner on bail in connection with a case involving offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The court directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount each.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each.

Bhoril Kamat Vs The State Of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.27856 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2018 Thana -JAYNAGAR District- MADHUBANI

¶3

====================================================== Bhoril Kamat, Son of Yogendra Kamat & Yogi Kamat, resident of VillageParwa, P.S.- Jainagar, District- Madhubani.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Anil Kumar Singh 1

¶8

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 10-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶10

Petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jai Nagar P.S. Case No. 86 of 2018 for offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶11

The prosecution case, as lodged by the police personnel, is that on secret information that one Indrajeet Yadav brings Nepali wine from Nepal and stores it in his orchard, the police conducted a raid, all the persons managed to flee away but the petitioner was apprehended and 960 bottles of Nepali Saufi wine was found in the orchard, hidden under the straw. Accordingly, a seizure list was prepared.

¶12

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27856 of 2018 (2) dt.10-05-2018

¶13

2/2

¶14

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, bears no criminal history and nothing has been recovered from his conscious possession. It is submitted that neither he is owner of the orchard nor the quantity has been quantified in the seizure list, only bottles have been specified. He submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 28.02.2018.

¶15

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer

¶16

for bail.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II cum Special Judge Excise Act, Madhubani, in connection with Jai Nagar P.S. Case No. 86 of 2018.

¶18

(Nilu Agrawal, J)

¶19

Devendra/-

¶20

U T

Bhoril Kamat v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhoril Kamat v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bilendra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Vijay Pasi Vs The State Of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Dilip Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar @ a. T. M. Vs The State Of Bihar

Tabrej Alam Vs The State Of Bihar