Allowed

Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur @ Jitendra Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Dec 2020CR. MISC./29916/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted regular bail to the petitioner in a proceedings for illicit liquor under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The petitioner, initially not named in the FIR, was in custody post-investigation conclusion

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each.

Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur @ Jitendra Thakur Vs The State of… — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29916 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-405 Year-2018 Thana- KANTI THARMAL POWER DistrictMuzaffarpur

¶3

====================================================== JITENDRA KUMAR @ GOLU THAKUR @ JITENDRA THAKUR S/o Ram Ekbal Thakur Resident of Village- Arara, P.S.- Kanti, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyenndra, Narain Singh, APP ======================================================

¶4

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶5

2 03-12-2020

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through video conferencing.

¶7

The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Kanti Tharmal P.S. Case no. 405 of 2018 registered under sections 30(a), 38 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶8

As per allegation in the FIR, about 515 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the house of one Sujit Roy.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. The FIR named coaccused Sujit Roy from whose house recovery is alleged to have taken place has been enlarged on anticipatory bail. Referring to the order of the learned Court below it is submitted that it has come during course of investigation almost two years after lodging of the FIR that the petitioner was also co-operating in the business of liquor. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case as also in other cases as mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the petition. He is in custody since 19.6.2020 and investigation in the case has concluded.

¶10

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29916 of 2020(2) dt.03-12-2020 2/2

¶11

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the

¶12

State.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, the Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Kanti P.S. Case no. 405 of 2018 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) only with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge Excise Act, Muzaffarpur.

¶14

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶15

Prakash/-

¶16

Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur @ Jitendra Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar @ Golu Thakur @ Jitendra Thakur 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

Jagarnath Ray @ Jagarnath Kumar Ray @ Jagannath Ray @ Jagarnath Kumar @ Jagnaath Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Bipat @ Rajesh Mehta @ Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Tufail Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Jha @ Satyam Kumar @ Satyam Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Mokhtar Ansari Vs the State of Bihar