Suraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3062 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-537 Year-2019 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== SURAJ KUMAR, aged about 32 years (Male), S/o Arun Chaudhary, Resident of Ulao, P.S.- Singhaul, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr. A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-05-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks from the date of restoration of normalcy. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State through virtual mode.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 30(a) and 32(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018. The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 232.24 liters wine is said to have been recovered from the Mini Truck in question.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3062 of 2021(2) dt.24-05-2021 2/3 There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is alleged that total 232.24 liters wine is recovered from the Mini Truck in question. The name of the petitioner has transpired in the present case as the petitioner is alleged to be the owner of the Mini Truck in question. 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 nature of the goods booked by the Transporter. 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 of the case and also the lockdown, let the petitioner above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Begusarai, in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 537 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3062 of 2021(2) dt.24-05-2021 3/3 Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

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