Amrendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.22484 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -22 Year- 2017 Thana -MALI District- AURANGABAD ====================================================== Amrendra Kumar Singh, Son of Kamta Singh, Resident of Village Narchahi, P.S. Mali, District Aurangabad.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 30(a) and 38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 120 liters wine is said to have been recovered.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. It is alleged that total 120 liters wine is recovered from motorcycle in question. The name of the petitioner has come on the basis of alleged recovery made from the motorcycle of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the said motorcycle has already been sold by the petitioner prior to institution of the F.I.R.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.22484 of 2018 (2) dt.18-04-2018 2/2 which is evident from Annexure-2 to the present application. The petitioner has been made accused in the present case due to mistake of fact. 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, let the petitioner above named, in the event of 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.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions JudgeVII-cum-Special Judge(Excise), Aurangabad, in connection with Mali P.S. Case No. 22 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T