Mahesh Rai @ Mahesh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30599 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-254 Year-2020 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== MAHESH RAI @ MAHESH KUMAR YADAV SON OF RAM EKBAL RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BERUA, P.S. GAIGHAT, DISTRICTMUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madhusudan Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-08-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State through virtual mode.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in Gaighat P.S. Case No. 254 of 2020 registered for the offence under Sections-272, 273/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections30(a) & 41, 56(E) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution case, in short, is that 731.46 liters wine is recovered.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30599 of 2021(2) dt.25-08-2021 2/3 the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is alleged that 731.46 litres wine is recovered from husk house of the co-accused. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by local residents. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present 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.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Muzaffarpur in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 254 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30599 of 2021(2) dt.25-08-2021 3/3 Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

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