Ram Dayal @ Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35198 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2021 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

RAM DAYAL @ AJAY KUMAR Son of Late Madan Das Resident of Village - Maksudanpur, P.S.- Fatuha, Dist.- Patna. 2.

Shiv Dayal Das Son of Late Madan Das Resident of Village - Maksudanpur, P.S.- Fatuha, Dist.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prashant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-09-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this application in respect of petitioner No. 2 as he has been taken into judicial custody.

Permission is accorded.

The application is dismissed as withdrawn in respect of petitioner No. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner No. 1 is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the Office, within a period of eight weeks.

The petitioner No. 1 is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35198 of 2021(2) dt.29-09-2021 2/3 Act, 2016.

The prosecution case, in short, is that 107.375 liters wine is recovered.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner No. 1 that petitioner No. 1 has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner No. 1. The name of the petitioner No. 1 has transpired as the recovery is made from the joint house of the petitioner where other family members also reside. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in this case. It is alleged that 107.375 liters wine is recovered from joint house of petitioner No. 1. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner No. 1. The petitioner No. 1 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 No. 1 is named in the F.I.R.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner No. 1, 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 furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, Excise, Patna in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 170/2021, subject to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35198 of 2021(2) dt.29-09-2021 3/3 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U T