Bhindi Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Singh @ Dhananjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20665 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -20 Year- 2018 Thana -KARAHGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Bhindi Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Singh @ Dhananjay Kumar, Son of Krishna Singh, resident of Village- Karghar, P.S. Karghar, District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-04-2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in paragraph no. 10 of the main bail application, in course of the day.

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 Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 60.480 liters wine is said to have been recovered.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20665 of 2018 (2) dt.11-04-2018 2/3 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 60.480 liters wine is recovered from the premises of hospital in question. The name of the petitioner has come on the basis of disclosure made by the local residents as per the F.I.R. The name of the local residents who have named the petitioner 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.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20665 of 2018 (2) dt.11-04-2018 3/3 with Karghar P.S. Case No. 20 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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