Hare Ram Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26002 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -228 Year- 2017 Thana -TURKAULIYA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Hare Ram Mahto, S/o Ramadhar Mahto, R/o Vill.- Shankar Saraiya Kaswa, P.S.- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-04-2018 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, 273/34 of the IPC, 30(a), 33, 36 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that total 30.9 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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26002 of 2018 (2) dt.30-04-2018 2/3 case. It is alleged that total 30.9 liters wine is recovered from field which is situated at the back of house of one Prabhu Sah. The name of the petitioner has come on the basis of secret information as per F.I.R. The source and genuineness of secret information 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. Other co-accused person Prabhu Sah has been granted anticipatory bail by another Coordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 39087 of 2017 dated 13.11.2017.

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 4th Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Excise, Motihari, East Champaran, in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26002 of 2018 (2) dt.30-04-2018 3/3 connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 228 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

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