Anshu Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14044 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2020 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria ====================================================== ANSHU RAJ S/o Rajaram Ray R/o Ward No. 03, P.C.C. Road, Near Bhagwati Mandir, Gangraho Mohanpur, P.S.- Bakhri, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party.

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Arjun Prasad, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 12-06-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State through Video Conferencing. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Allouli P.S. Case No.09 of 2020/G.R. No.94 of 2020 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018, pending in the court of the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Excise Act, Khagaria. The accusation is of recovery of 96 bottles, each containing 180 ml., 40 bottles, each containing 375 ml. and 20 bottles, each containing 750 ml., liquor from the Pickup Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No.BR09H/9946. The paper regarding the ownership of the vehicle was also recovered from the vehicle, in which the name of the petitioner as the owner of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14044 of 2020(2) dt.12-06-2020 2/2 the seized vehicle was detailed.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that, admittedly, the petitioner is the owner of the seized Pickup Bolero vehicle but on the date of the occurrence, the vehicle was being driven by the Driver Kundan Kumar Sahni. The petitioner had no knowledge about keeping the liquor by the driver in his vehicle.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T