Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27975 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -256 Year- 2017 Thana -SAHEBPUR KAMAL District- BEGUSARAI ====================================================== SANTOSH YADAV @ SANTOSH KUMAR, S/o Krishnandan Yadav, R/o Vill.- Khar Diyara, P.S.- Sahebpur Kamal, District- Begusarai. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. S. Ehteshamuddin, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-05-2018 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, 274 of the I.P.C and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 13.500 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 13.500 liters wine is recovered from different persons. Out of which, 1.500 liters wine is said to have been recovered from the petitioner as per seizure list. The name of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27975 of 2018 (2) dt.07-05-2018 2/2 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.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge VIIth, Begusarai-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Begusarai, in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 256 of 2017, G.R. No. 3297 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. U.K.