← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36461/2020bail granted

Rohit Sahni @ Rohit Kumar Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2021-03-26Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36461 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2020 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== ROHIT SAHNI @ ROHIT KUMAR SAHNI son of KISHORI SAHNI Resident of Village- Dome Dhuriya, P.S.- Keoti, District- Darbhnage. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Girish Chandra Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.

Counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

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

The prosecution case, in short, is that 49.980 liters wine is recovered.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and there is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has come on the basis of secret information as per F.I.R. The source and genuineness of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36461 of 2020(2) dt.26-03-2021 2/2 the secret information has not been disclosed by the prosecution. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in this case. It is alleged that 49.980 liters wine is recovered from the open field. 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.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/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 learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (Excise Act), Darbhanga in connection with G.O. case No.436 of 2020 arising out of Keoti P.S. case No.42 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Narendra/- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T