Partly allowed

Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Sept 2021CR. MISC./21726/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking regular bail for illegal spirit possession obstructing excise operations, the Patna High Court rejected bail for two younger petitioners with criminal antecedents but granted bail to an aged petitioner, directing renewal after one year.

What did the court decide?

Bail of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 rejected; bail of petitioner no. 3 granted; liberty to renew bail application after one year for petitioners 1 and 2.

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21726 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-206 Year-2020 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Santosh Kumar Son of Baijnath Mahto @ Baighanath Prasad Resident of Village- Baligaon, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad.

¶5

Ranjeet Kumar Son of Baijnath Mahto @ Baighanath Prasad Resident of Village- Baligaon, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad.

¶6

Baijnath Mahto @ Baighanath Prasad S/o Late Brahmdeo Mahto Resident of Village- Baligaon, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 15-09-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

¶14

The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016

¶15

As per the prosecution case, 630 litres of spirit was recovered from the house of the petitioners.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 who happen to be the son of petitioner no.3 have all been falsely implicated in the case because of the antecedents of petitioner nos.1 and 2. No

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21726 of 2021(2) dt.15-09-2021 2/2

¶18

incriminating article has been recovered from their possession or from their house. They are in custody since 9.12.2020. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case. The petitioner no.3 who is an 80 years old man has no criminal antecedent.

¶19

Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts of the case together with the petitioner nos.1 and 2 having criminal antecedents under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, the Court is not inclined to enlarge them on bail and the application for bail of petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are rejected.

¶21

Liberty is granted to the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 to renew their prayer for bail on completing one year in custody.

¶22

In the facts of the case petitioner no.3, Baijnath Mahto @ Baighanath Prasad is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case no. 206 of 2020 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Aurangabad.

¶23

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶24

Bibhash U

Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raushan Kumar Singh @ Tonu Singh Vs The State of BIhar

Dhanu Ram @ Dhanu Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Gautam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ganga Sah @ Gangadhar Sah @ Gango Sah Vs the State of Bihar

Santu Rajbanshi Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Pandey Vs The State of Bihar