Allowed

Ripu Yadav @ Rinku Yadav @ Varun Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Sept 2022CR. MISC./42058/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. No.42058 of 2022 regarding bail application in Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act case. Court allowed bail after framing of charge on furnishing guarantee and fulfilling conditions.

What did the court decide?

Order that the petitioner be released on bail after framing of charge by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties.

Ripu Yadav @ Rinku Yadav @ Varun Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42058 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-270 Year-2021 Thana- KHIJARSARAI District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

RIPU YADAV @ RINKU YADAV @ VARUN YADAV SON OF BINAY YADAV R/O VILLAGE- BIRBAL BIGHA, P.S.- BELAGANJ, DISTRICTGAYA

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.N. A. Shamsi For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 15-09-2022

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Khizarsarai P.S. Case No. 270 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

¶16

As per prosecution case, there is alleged recovery of 70 litres country made mahua wine from the motorcycle in question and co-accused, Arun Kumar and Vikash Kumar apprehended on the spot disclosed that the said alleged wine as well as motorcycle belongs to the petitioner.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42058 of 2022(3) dt.15-09-2022 2/3

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 10.03.2022 and bears eleven criminal antecedent of similar nature. Charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from physical or conscious possession of the petitioner and he has been falsely implicated in this case.The petitioner has neither concerned with the said motorcycle nor concerned with the seized wine. Co-accused Arun Kumar and Vikash Kumar have already been granted bail by the court below and the case of petitioner stands on better footing.

¶19

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

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, petitioner is not apprehended on the spot, charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, after framing of charge 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 Excise Judge, Gaya in connection

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42058 of 2022(3) dt.15-09-2022 3/3

¶22

with Khizarsarai P.S. Case No. 270 of 2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(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.

¶24

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶25

(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.

¶26

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶27

amitkumar/vasudha

¶28

U T

Ripu Yadav @ Rinku Yadav @ Varun Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ripu Yadav @ Rinku Yadav @ Varun 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramu @ Ramekbal Kumar @ Ramakabal Kumar @ Ramval Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Paplesh Kumar @ Paplesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Birendra Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Rita Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar Vs the State of Bihar