Binod Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22218 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== Binod Manjhi S/o Late Tarkeshwar Manjhi R/o vill - Kalawanchak Kewara, P.S. - Punpun, Distt. - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-03-2024

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

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

4. Allegation is of recovery of 18 litres of liquor from the house of Raju Manjhi and 18 litres of liquor from the house of the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and after amendment in the Excise Act in the year 2018, the concept of deemed possession and presumed offender has been done away with. It

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22218 of 2024(2) dt.29-03-2024 2/2 is further submitted that petitioner came to be implicated at the instance of the Chawkidar. It is next submitted that in majority of the cases, the police are implicating the innocent people at the instance of the Chawkidar in mechanical manner. It is also submitted that if the Chawkidar was aware about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence then whey he did not inform the police prior to the institution of the instant FIR which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution.

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

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 16 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T