Kallu Kumar @ Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3570 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-381 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== Kallu Kumar @ Ajay Kumar S/O Munna Ram R/o Village- Allaudin Chak, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jay Ram Prasad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 24-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 381 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the police has recovered total 100 litres of liquor from Tempo.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner is the driver of the seized tempo

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3570 of 2025(2) dt.24-01-2025 2/3 and had no knowledge of the illicit liquor being kept in the tempo. The petitioner is not the owner of the tempo. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the present anticipatory bail application. The petitioner has no concern with the recovered liquor. There is a non-compliance of Section 103 of the B.N.S.S. which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution case.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the co-accused Mamta Kumari has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 07.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 88067 of 2024.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

7. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected. If the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3570 of 2025(2) dt.24-01-2025 3/3 surrenders before the court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T