Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Rajendra Dhari & Anr vs The State Of Bihar on 8 August, 2017

Author: Vinod Kumar Sinha

Bench: Vinod Kumar Sinha

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  Criminal Miscellaneous No.35700 of 2017
                 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -36 Year- 2017 Thana -SARE District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF)
                 ======================================================
                 1. Rajendra Dhari
                 2. Mahendra Dhari, Both Sons of Arjun Dhari , Resident of Village-
                    Oanda, P.S.- Sare, District- Nalanda.

                                                                                .... ....   Petitioners
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                                .... .... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :   Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s   : Mr. Anil Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA
                 ORAL ORDER

2   08-08-2017

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

This is an application for bail in connection with Sare P.S.Case No. 36 of 2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(A), 30(C) and 30(D) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Allegation as per FIR is that police raided the place of occurrence and found several articles for manufacturing of wine and allegation against the petitioners is of manufacturing wine and they have been arrested at the spot and further 60 litres of wine has been recovered. Further petitioners have two other cases of similar type of the years 2016 & 2017.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that nothing has been recovered from their possession and they have Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.35700 of 2017 (2) dt.08-08-2017 2/2 falsely been implicated in this case and they are in custody for more than one month.

Heard learned APP also, who has opposed the prayer for bail.

Having heard both sides and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within four months. If trial is not concluded within the said period, petitioners may renew their prayer for bail.

With the above observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) spal/-

U