Arvind Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14842 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -87 Year- 2016 Thana -GAYA MUFFSIL District- GAYA ====================================================== Arvind Yadav, S/o Late Kedar Yadav, Resident of Village- Maniara, P.S.- Mufassil, District- Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar -1, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-03-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 272, 273 of the IPC and 47(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 120 liters wine is said to have been recovered.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. 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 120 liters wine is recovered by the side of bank of river in abandoned state. The name of the petitioner has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14842 of 2018 (2) dt.14-03-2018 2/2 come on the basis of secret information as per F.I.R. The source and genuineness of 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. 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, let the petitioner 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge (Excise), Gaya, in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 87 of 2016 (G.R. No. 993 of 2016), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T