Allowed

Manraj Sah v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2022CR. MISC./2006/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Patna granted conditional bail to the petitioner in a case for illegal liquor manufacturing (Sections 413, 414 IPC, Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act) after the charge-sheet was filed and no evidence was recovered from the petitioner personally.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount subject to conditions of attendance and no tampering with evidence.

Manraj Sah Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2006 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2021 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

MANRAJ SAH S/o Mewalal Sah Resident of Village- Lala Tola, P.S.Sirisiya O.P. (Chanpatia), District- West Champaran.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 01-07-2022

¶11

Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State in virtual court proceeding.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chanpatiya (Sirisiya O.P.) P.S. Case No. 372 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 413, 414 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.

¶14

As per prosecution case, there is alleged recovery of 9 bags Nausadar each containing 50 KG, 8 bags sugar each containing 50 Kg and 4 Kg Nausadar, Two quintal Gur (Mittha), one packet polythene and parts of a Hero Honda Motorcycle from the house-cum-shop of co-accused Mewalal Sah who is

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2006 of 2022(3) dt.01-07-2022 2/3

¶16

the father of present petitioner. It is alleged that co-accused Mewalal Sah was apprehended by the police and he disclosed that house in question belongs to him and shop in question is being run by him and petitioner. It is alleged that petitioner fled away at the time of raid.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 06.11.2021. Petitioner bears one criminal antecedent. Charge-sheet has already been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering the prosecution evidence. He further submits that petitioner is not apprehended on the spot. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. Seizure list has not been prepared as per law. He has further submitted that no illicit liquor has been recovered from the house-cum-shop of the petitioner.

¶18

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, charge-sheet has already been submitted, petitioner is not apprehended on the spot and argument advanced on behalf of the parties and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2006 of 2022(3) dt.01-07-2022 3/3

¶21

above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Chanpatiya (Sirisiya O.P.) P.S. Case No. 372 of 2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶22

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶23

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶24

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶25

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶26

shahzad/amit

¶27

U T

Manraj Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manraj Sah 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

Jeevlal Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Niranjan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nurul Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjit Yadav @ Sanjit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chaui Sahni @ Chaudi Shani @ Chauri Sahni Vs the State of Bihar