Dharmendra Paswan @ Dharmendra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68735 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2021 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali ====================================================== DHARMENDRA PASWAN @ DHARMENDRA, (Male), aged about 35 years, Son of Shivchandra Paswan, Resident of Village- Chakphool, P.S.- Ganga Bridge, District- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-12-2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office, within a period of eight weeks.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 139/2021 for the offence registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 8 liters wine is recovered from the Banswari.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68735 of 2021(2) dt.14-12-2021 2/3 has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioner. It is alleged that total 8 liters wine is recovered from the Banswari in question. The Banswari in question does not belong to the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has transpired in the present case on the basis of disclosure made by the local Chaukidar. 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, 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 furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Excise Court, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68735 of 2021(2) dt.14-12-2021 3/3 No. 139/2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T