Allowed

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Nov 2022CR. MISC./40092/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Processed a bail application filed by Rakesh Kumar in a liquor seizure case. The court granted bail after considering the lack of prior recovery from the petitioner and delay in trial, subject to furnishing a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/ with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions.

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40092 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2021 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav Son Of Raghubans Rai R/O VillageGyasudinpur, Tola Kalyan, P.S.- Gaighat, District- Muzaffarpur, Bihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, A.P.P.

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 16-11-2022 Heard Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned counsel

¶14

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

¶15

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that earlier, the petitioner had filed regular bail application vide Criminal Miscellaneous No. 67579 of 2021 which was disposed of as withdrawn vide order dated 10.05.2022 as one criminal case was not mentioned in paragraph no. 3 of the said bail application.

¶16

An opportunity was given to the petitioner to file fresh application without suppressing any fact on affidavit and he was given liberty to utilize the certified copy of the impugned order to avoid any further delay.

¶17

The present application has been filed in the light of

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40092 of 2022(3) dt.16-11-2022 2/4

¶19

the said order making prayer for bail in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 131 of 2021 dated 25.03.2021 for offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a)/36/41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.

¶20

Prosecution case in brief is that altogether 168.075 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from one container and one Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No. NL01AB-3168 and BR06PE-2107 respectively. However, one Alto car escaped. Altogether total 15 persons have been made accused out of which driver and owner of the Alto car managed to escape from the spot.

¶21

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather he has been made accused in the present case due to dirty village politics. He further submits that he has no concern with the said vehicle which were seized on the spot. Petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2021. He further submits that other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R. have already been released on bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court.

¶22

Learned A.P.P., for the State has vehemently opposed

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40092 of 2022(3) dt.16-11-2022 3/4

¶24

the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶25

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

¶26

case and having perused the allegation made in the F.I.R., nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, petitioner is in custody since 29.09.2021 and there is no likelihood of trial being concluded in near future, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Muzaffarpur, Bihar in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 131 of 2021 dated 25.03.2021 subject to the following conditions:

¶27

(i) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.

¶28

(ii) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.

¶29

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

¶30

(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40092 of 2022(3) dt.16-11-2022 4/4

¶32

take steps to cancel his bail bond.

¶33

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶34

Niraj/-

¶35

U T

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Yadav 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

Pradeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kishun Hembram Vs the State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Abhimanyu Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Sanjiv Kumar Rai @ Sanjiv Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Mahesh Rai Vs the State of Bihar