Jitendra Khalifa @ Paua @ Jitendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32734 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2021 Thana- MEHANDIA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== JITENDRA KHALIFA @ PAUA @ JITENDRA KUMAR, aged about 30 years (Male), Son of Hansh Khalifa, Resident of Village - Walidad Nut Bigha, P.S.- Mehandia, Distt.- Arwal.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party :

Mrs. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-08-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from the date of restoration of normalcy. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State through virtual mode.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahandia P.S. Case No. 24 of 2021 for the offence registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 39 liters wine is recovered from the Banswari and joint house of the petitioner.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32734 of 2021(2) dt.06-08-2021 2/3 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 39 liters wine is recovered. Out of which, 30 liters wine is said to have been recovered from the joint house of the petitioner. 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 of the case, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or 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 the learned A.D.J.-II-cumSpecial Judge, Excise, Jehanabad, in connection with Mehandia P.S. Case No. 24 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32734 of 2021(2) dt.06-08-2021 3/3 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) U.K./- U T