Ratnesh Prasad @ Ratnesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20435 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-379 Year-2022 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

RATNESH PRASAD @ RATNESH KUMAR Son of Ramjanam Saah R/VMasha Narottam, Ward no. 3, P.S- Bairgania, Dist- Sitamarhi 2.

Amarnath Prasad Son of Narendra Prasad R/V- Mushachak, Ward no. 6, P.sBairgania Dist- Sitamarhi 3.

Kaushal Prasad @ Kaushal Kishor Prasad Son of Late Siyaram Prasad R/VMushachak, PS- Bairgania, Dist- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Bhakta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code, 7 E.C. Act and 3/7 FCO Act, 1985. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are a person with clean antecedent and have license for selling fertilizers. It is next submitted that allegation is of recovery of 2025 kg of urea fertilizer from a pick-up van and 1845 kg of urea from another pick-up van. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and it is next submitted that one Mohan Kumar was arrested with the vehicle and he disclosed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20435 of 2023(2) dt.24-06-2023 2/2 the name of the culprits but did not name the petitioners as such, the petitioners names did not transpired in the FIR. It is next submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation and will present themselves before investigating officer as and when required for eliciting the truth. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

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 Riga P.S. Case No. 379 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Adnan/- U T