Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20673 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2024 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Sonu Kumar S/o Dinesh Ray R/o Vill - Sarangpur Purwi, P.S. - Tajpur (Halai O.P.), Dist. - Samastipur 2.

Rahul Kumar Roy S/o Shivchandra Roy R/o Vill - Sarangpur Purwi, P.S. - Tajpur (Halai O.P.), Dist. - Samastipur 3.

Muskan Kumar S/o Nagendra Ray @ Nagendra Kumar Ray R/o Vill - Sarangpur Purwi, P.S. - Tajpur (Halai O.P.), Dist. - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-03-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner no.2 Rahul Kumar.

3. Permission is accorded.

4. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273 and 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and allegation is of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20673 of 2024(2) dt.27-03-2024 2/2 recovery of 61.560 litres of liquor from the hut of Chandra Kishore Rai. It is next submitted that petitioners were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession and even alleged recovery is from a place, which does not belong to the petitioners and they came to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone, when petitioners admittedly are persons with clean antecedent.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

7. 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 Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) 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 Tajpur (Halai O.P.) P.S. Case No.66/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T