Alok Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46605 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -100 Year- 2017 Thana -PATEPUR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ====================================================== Alok Kumar Jha, S/o Ratnesh Kumar Jha, R/o Vill.- Mandaidih, P.S.- Patepur, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Smt. Madhuri Lata, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-07-2018 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 414, 120(B)/34 of the IPC, 30(a), 32(ii), 33(ii), 41(i) and 47 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 1729.08 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 1729.08 liters wine is recovered. Out of which, 8.64 liters wine is said to have been recovered from one of the motorcycles bearing Registration No. 31T-8061. The name of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46605 of 2018 (2) dt.31-07-2018 2/2 the petitioner has come on the basis of seized said motorcycle. The petitioner is alleged to be owner of the said motorcycle. The said motorcycle was given by the petitioner to a co-villager for his personal use. 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.-IInd-cum-Special Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Patepur P.S. Case No. 100/2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T