Rajeev Kumar Sah @ Rajeev Sah @ Rajeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16832 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2024 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.
RAJEEV KUMAR SAH @ RAJEEV SAH @ RAJEEV KUMAR Son of Dhodhai Sah Resident of Priyankar, P.S.-Dhamdaha, District-Purnea. 2.
JAYJAY RAM YADAV @ JUGNI Son of Late Upendra Yadav Resident of Bhawanipur, P.S.-Bhawanipur, District-Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Md Fazle Karim For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Khurshid Anwar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 413, 414, 401, 467, 468, 120B, 272, 273 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of two cases and petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 6103.8 liters of liquor from a truck parked outside the house of petitioner no. 1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even the alleged recovery is from a vehicle which does not belong to them and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16832 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/2 they came to be implicated by the local people but then the name of the people who disclosed the name of the petitioner is not disclosed in the FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that it appears that the police, in order to save the real culprits, falsely implicated the petitioners.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T