Kamod Yadav @ Kamod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9952 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1681 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Kamod Yadav @ Kamod Kumar Yadav S/O Late Jaikishun Prasad Resident of village- Shankar Parsauna, P.S- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran 2.

Khalipha Yadav @ Sajan Yadav S/O Late Ramayan Yadav Resident of village- Shankar Saraiya Ahir Tola, P.S- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Arun Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 14-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 1681 of 2024 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The prosecution case in short, is that, total 25 litres of spirit, 12 kg packet of plastic rapper was recovered from motorcycle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that motorcycle in question do not belong to the petitioners. The petitioner no. 1 has eleven

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9952 of 2025(2) dt.14-02-2025 2/2 criminal antecedents in which he is on bail and petitioner no. 2 has three criminal antecedents in which he is on bail.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners and submit that the petitioner no. 1 bears eleven criminal antecedents and petitioner no. 2 bears three criminal antecedents. Hence, the petitioners does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and criminal antecedents of the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. The prayer is rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for regular bail. If any such application is filed, the Court below shall consider and dispose of the same on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Ranjan/- U T