Subodh Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26857 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -393 Year- 2017 Thana -JAYNAGAR District- MADHUBANI ====================================================== Subodh Kumar Sah, S/o Devendra Prasad Sah @ Devendra Sah, resident of Village- Kumarkhat, P.S.- Ladaniya, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ataur Rahman, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 272, 273 of the I.P.C. and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 312 liters wine is said to have been recovered.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is alleged that total 312 liters wine is recovered from two vehicles i.e., Maruti Suzuki Alto 800 car and Tata Indigo ecs. Out of which, 117 liters wine is said to have been recovered from

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26857 of 2018 (2) dt.02-05-2018 2/2 Maruti Suzuki Alto 800 car in question. The name of the petitioner has come on the basis of seized car. The petitioner is said to be the owner of the said car in question. The car was being used as a Taxi by the driver of the petitioner. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in this 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/ Complaint Case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J. II, Madhubani, in connection with Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 393 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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