Patna High CourtCR. MISC./5970/2023dismissed

Bebi Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2023-04-10Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5970 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2022 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== BEBI DEVI Wife of Anil Pahariya Resident of Village- Harinkol, Pahariya Tola, P.S.- Pirpainti, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akbar Ali ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 10-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Pirpainti P.S. Case No. 204 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a), 30(c) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge Exclusive Excise Court No.-2, Bhagalpur. As per prosecution case, the joint house of this Rubi Devi and Babi Devi (petitioner) was raided and search was made from where three quintals of dry Mahua flower and 15 liter of country made wine were recovered. It is also alleged that 1000 liter semi constructed country made Mahua wine was also disposed of at the place of recovery.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5970 of 2023(2) dt.10-04-2023 2/2 such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has got not criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the illicit liquor was recovered from the joint house of the petitioner. Hence, she does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in connection with Pirpainti P.S. Case No. 204 of 2022. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T