Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46522/2018bail granted

Manoranjan Singh And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2018-07-31Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.46522 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -127 Year- 2018 Thana -MANJHI District- SARAN ======================================================

1. Manoranjan Singh, S/O Sanjay Singh.

2. Ravi Kumar Singh, S/O Ramesh Singh. Both residents of VillageTajpur, P.S. Manjhi, District-Saran at Chapra. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-07-2018 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 30, 30(a) and 38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 331.5 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 331.5 liters wine is recovered from the Brick-kiln in question. The Brick-kiln

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46522 of 2018 (2) dt.31-07-2018 2/2 in question does not belong to the petitioners. The name of the petitioners has come on the basis of disclosure made by the local Chaukidar. 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 A.D.J. 6th Saran at Chapra, in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 127 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