Rambali Manjhi @ Rajbali Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6269 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2020 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== Rambali Manjhi @ Rajbali Manjhi, aged about 50 years, Male, Son Of Sitaram Manjhi, Village Kharshal, Mushari Tola , Ward No.2 , P.S. Bettiah Muffasil, District West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Akhileshwar Kumar Shrivastva For the Opposite Party :

Mr. A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-05-2021 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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 25 liters wine is said to have been recovered from the five different places.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6269 of 2021(2) dt.25-05-2021 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 altogether total 25 liters wine is recovered from the five different places. Out of which, total 05 liters wine is said to have been recovered from the hut of the petitioner. The hut in question belongs to joint family of the petitioner. 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 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/ 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 Special Judge, (Excise), West Champaran, in connection with Bettiah Mufasil P.S. Case No. 212 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6269 of 2021(2) dt.25-05-2021 3/3 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