Umesh Rajbanshi @ Laddu v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
of liquor, this application for regular bail is allowed
Provisions considered
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 ss. 30(a)(d), 37(c), 41
Judgment
Operative part
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1 ORAL ORDER 2 23-08-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 448 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 30(a)(d), 37(c), 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2016. liquor. Recovery is of total 80 liters of country made Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2023. Considering the period of custody and the recovery of liquor, this application for regular bail is allowed. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52237 of 2023(2) dt.23-08-2023 Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail after completing six months in custody, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No.-2, Nawada in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 448 of 2021. The petitioner will visit Rajauli Police Station on the first Sunday of each month. Any default in appearance at the Police Station would result in cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Guddu/- U T
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: of liquor, this application for regular bail is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — ss. 30(a)(d), 37(c), 41.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.