Mahendrajit Kumar @ Amarjit Kumar @ Amarjit Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56419 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2021 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

MAHENDRAJIT KUMAR @ AMARJIT KUMAR @ AMARJIT SAHNI SON OF MACMILAN SAHNI @ MICMILAN SAHNI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- FATEHABAD, P.S- PAROO, DIST- MUZAFFARPUR 2.

RAGHU SAHNI @ RAGHUBAR SAHNI SON OF BISHUNI SAHNI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- FATEHABAD, P.S- PAROO, DISTMUZAFFARPUR 3.

AVINASH KUMAR SON OF RAGHU SAHNI RESIDENT OF VILLAGEFATEHABAD, P.S- PAROO, DIST- MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raju Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kanhaiya Kishore ,App,100 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State through virtual mode.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of eight weeks.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section-272, 273, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section-30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution case, in short, is that 44.625 liters wine is recovered.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56419 of 2021(2) dt.03-12-2021 2/2 tampering of witnesses alleged against them. They have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is alleged that 44.625 litres wine is recovered from the car. The car does not belong to the petitioners. The names of the petitioners have transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioners in the present 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.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve 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 learned Special Judge, Excise Act, Muzaffarpur in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 47 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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