Surendra Jha And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.28419 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -152 Year- 2018 Thana -HAJIPUR District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Surendra Jha, S/O Sri Gopi Kant Jha, resident of Muffati Mohalla, P.S. Town, Hajipur, District-Vaishali (Bihar).

2. Abhishekh Kumar @ Abhishek Kumar, S/O Sri Surendra Jha, resident of Muffati Mohalla, P.S. Town, Hajipur, District-Vaishali (Bihar). .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ranjeet Tiwary, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Kumar Virendra Narayan, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-05-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 188, 272, 273/34 of the I.P.C, 30 and 38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 8.100 liters wine is said to have been recovered.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is alleged that total 8.100 liters wine is recovered from three different persons. Out of which, 7.380 liters wine is said to have been recovered from joint house

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.28419 of 2018 (2) dt.08-05-2018 2/2 of the petitioners. The name of the petitioners has come on the basis of alleged recovery made from joint house of the petitioners where other family members also reside. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioners in this case. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners 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 petitioners are named in the F.I.R/ Complaint Case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge, Excise, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 152 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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