Allowed

Nilesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Jun 2020CR. MISC./19397/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regular bail in Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act case where illicit liquor was recovered from a Safari vehicle not owned by him. Court granted bail considering petitioner's non-ownership of vehicle and existing judicial custody, directing adherence to social distancing guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted regular bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties to the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Araria.

Nilesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19397 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2020 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria

¶3

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

¶4

NILESH KUMAR Son of Banshlal Yadav Resident of Village - Baluahi, Ward No. 26, P.S.- Khagaria, Distt – Khagaria .. ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .. ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. D. P. Tiwary ======================================================

¶5

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶6

2 09-06-2020 Learned Counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects, as pointed out by the Stamp Reporter, within a period of eight weeks from today.

¶7

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, through video conferencing.

¶8

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Araria (Bairgachhi) Police Station Case No. 49 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30 (a)/38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶9

The allegation against the petitioner is that 29.30 litres of illicit liquor has been recovered from one Safari vehicle.

¶10

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession or the vehicle belonging to the petitioner and statement has been made in

¶11

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19397 of 2020(2) dt.09-06-2020 2/2

¶12

paragraph 7 that the Safari vehicle does not belong to the petitioner. He further submits that there are five criminal cases pending against the petitioner and the petitioner is on bail in all the five cases. He further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.01.2020.

¶13

After having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts that the petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle in question and the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.01.2020, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

¶14

Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/(twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, Excise Act, Araria, in connection with Araria (Bairgachhi) Police Station Case No. 49 of 2020.

¶15

It is made clear that at the time of furnishing bail bonds, all the parties shall follow the guidelines regarding social distancing.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

¶17

Prabhakar Anand/-

¶18

U √ T √

Nilesh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nilesh Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brajesh Sahni @ Brajesh Sahani @ Brajesh Kumar Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Tunna Singh @ Hari Narayan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Amrendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Madan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dipak Kumar @ Dzzpok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar