Gopal Sahani @ Ganesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11842 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2021 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== GOPAL SAHANI @ GANESH KUMAR Son of Ram Udit Sahni Resident of Village - Jagdishpur, P.s.- Maniyari, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Hans Lal Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State through virtual mode.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Maniyari P.S. Case No. 285 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections-30(a), 36 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The prosecution case, in short, is that 1114.800 liters wine is recovered.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is alleged that 1114.800 litres wine is recovered from the pick up Van and hut. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11842 of 2022(2) dt.11-03-2022 2/2 petitioner is not owner of the pick up Van in question. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner had no knowledge regarding the alleged incident. There is no compliance of Section 100 Cr.P.C.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise Act, Court No. II, Muzaffarpur in connection with Maniyari P.S. Case No. 285 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T