Subodh Kumar @ Subodh Singh @ Prabodh Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.50717 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -68 Year- 2018 Thana -SAHAJITPUR District- SARAN ======================================================
1. Subodh Kumar @ Subodh Singh @ Prabodh Kumar, Son of Late Munni Singh,
2. Vikesh Singh @ Vikesh Kumar Singh @ Bavali Singh @ Bewel Singh, Son of Ganesh Singh, Both above resident of Village- Pipra, Police Station- Sahajitpur, District- Saran at Chapra. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Satya Prakash, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Binod Kumar 2, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case for the offence registered under Sections 30 and 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 2008.080 liters wine is said to have been recovered.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering with the witnesses alleged against the petitioners. The petitioners have falsely been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50717 of 2018 (2) dt.20-08-2018 2/3 implicated in the present case. It is alleged that total 2008.080 liters wine is recovered from the Truck in question. The Truck in question does not belong to the petitioners. The name of the petitioners has come in the present case as the police party claims to have identified 11 persons including the petitioners in torch light. The petitioners are not known to the police party nor the police party is known to the petitioners. Hence, source of identification made by the police party itself is doubtful. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioners in this case. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners 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 petitioners are named in the F.I.R/ Complaint Case. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 6th Additional District Judge, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Sahajitpur P.S.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50717 of 2018 (2) dt.20-08-2018 3/3 Case No. 68 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