← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14599/2021dismissed

Sunil Prasad @ Sunil Kumar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2022-01-04Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14599 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-417 Year-2020 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

SUNIL PRASAD @ SUNIL KUMAR PRASAD Son of Anil Prasad @ Lakshman Prasad Resident of Village- Ekderawa, P.S.- Paharpur, DistrictEast Champaran at Motihari. 2.

Pappu Prasad Son of Anil Prasad @ Lakshman Prasad Resident of VillageEkderawa, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari. 3.

Rajesh Prasad @ Pardeshi Prasad Son of Anil Prasad @ Lakshman Prasad Resident of Village- Ekderawa, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari.

4.

Dulare Prasad Son of Bharat Prasad Resident of Village- Ekderawa, P.S.- Paharpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-01-2022 Heard Mr. Binay Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Paharpur P.S. Case No. 417 of 2020 dated 10.11.2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 30, 30(a), 33, 34, 36 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition Excise Act, 2016.

Approximately 5000 litres of liquor/spirit is said to have been recovered from the house of the petitioners.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14599 of 2021(2) dt.04-01-2022 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the house belongs to their father and not them. The accusation against them is based on wrong information provided by the two of the arrested accused persons.

However, regard being had to the fact that a huge quantity of spirit has been recovered from the house of the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them.

Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T