Allowed

Ram Sudishtha Rai @ Sudishtha Rai v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 May 2019CR. MISC./19334/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to petitioners facing charges for producing liquor in contravention of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and IPC sections penalising intoxicating drinks, noting lack of recovery from their possession and clean antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of like amount within four weeks of production.

Ram Sudishtha Rai @ Sudishtha Rai Vs The State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19334 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-520 Year-2018 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi

¶3

======================================================

¶4

RAM SUDISHTHA RAI @ SUDISHTHA RAI, Son of Late Ram Lakshan Rai, Resident of Village - Bishwanathpur, P.S.- Dumra, Distt.- Sitamarhi.

¶5

Bablu Kumar, Son of Ram Sudishtha Rai @ Sudishtha Rai, Resident of Village - Bishwanathpur, P.S.- Dumra, Distt.- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 21-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶13

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No.520 of 2018 for allegedly having committed the offence under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(A), 38 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioners.

¶15

Considering the fact that the alleged recovery was not from the conscious possession of the petitioners and also that

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19334 of 2019(2) dt.21-05-2019 2/2

¶17

the petitioners have got no criminal antecedents, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J. II-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Sitamarhi, in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No.520 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

(Anjana Mishra, J)

¶19

PNM

¶20

U T

Ram Sudishtha Rai @ Sudishtha Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sudishtha Rai @ Sudishtha Rai 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

Amjad Khan and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Tinku Paswan @ Tikku Paswan Vs the State of Bihar

Parmen Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Kumar Yadav @ Shyam Yadav @ Shyamali Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Haroon Mian Vs The State of Bihar

Mithilesh Mishra Vs The State of Bihar