Sanjay Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65556 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-456 Year-2019 Thana- PUPRI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SANJAY SAHNI Son of Dukhi Sahni Resident of Village - Dumharpatti , Tole Bhakurhiya, P.S.- Pupri, Distt.- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State through virtual mode.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of eight weeks.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 456 of 2019 registered for the offence under Sections-272, 273, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. The prosecution case, in short, is that 358.500 liters wine is recovered.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is alleged that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65556 of 2021(2) dt.10-12-2021 2/2 358.500 litres wine is recovered from the car. The petitioner is not owner of the car, in question. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present 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.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cumSpecial Judge, Excise Act, Sitamarhi in connection with Pupri P.S. Case No. 456 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Sudhir Singh, J) A.K.V.//- U T