IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No. 14260 of 2008 KAMLESH KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR WITH Cr. Misc. No. 15574 of 2008 DRIVER RANJEET KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ******** 2 07.05.2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioners and the A.P.P. representing the State. Both the petitioners are accused in a case under Sections 420, 414, 290/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 47A of the Excise Act. On behalf of the petitioner Kamlesh Kumar, it has been submitted by Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that as a matter of fact the petitioner has no concern with the alleged consignment or the owner of the assignment inasmuch as he was only the driver of the truck on which the goods were loaded without any conscious knowledge of the petitioner that the transportation of such goods was in any way illegal. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.02.2008. Keeping in view that the petitioner Kamlesh Kumar has no direct nexus with the recovery of the alleged consignment and he has remained in custody for a period of three months and further that he 2 has no criminal antecedents, this Court direct for release of the petitioner Kamlesh Kumar in Jehanabad Police Station Case No. 37 of 2008 (G.R. No. 192 of 2008) on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad with a condition that one of the sureties must be either the mother or the wife of the petitioner. As far as the case of Driver Ranjeet Kumar is concerned, though he also is a driver but it is the statement of the petitioner himself in paragraph no. 6 of the bail application that he has a driving license and drives the vehicle which belongs to one Pankaj Kumar Singh. It is this vehicle of Pankaj Kumar Singh from which the consignment of liquor has been recovered and for which a prosecution under Section 47A of the Excise Act has been lodged. Moreover, Pankaj Kumar Singh is also an accused in the present case, and therefore, the case of Driver Ranjeet Kumar is quite distinguishable from the case of Kamlesh Kumar. Consequently, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner Driver Ranjeet Kumar and accordingly, the prayer for bail on his behalf is hereby rejected at this stage. However, in view of the fact that he has 3 remained in custody for almost a period of three months, he may move this Court in case the trial is not taken up on completion of his six months in judicial custody. Anand (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)