Sudhir Kumar Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14499 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2019 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== SUDHIR KUMAR SAHANI Son of Arjun Sahani Resident of VillageRatnauli, P.S.-Maniyari, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Hari Kishore Thakur, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 03-09-2020 Heard both sides through Video Conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Maniyari P.S. Case No.343 of 2019 registered under Sections 272, 273, 290 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

The informant, a police officer of Maniyari P.S., got information that Sudhir Kumar Sahani(the petitioner) had kept liquor in his house meant for keeping firewood. On such, a raid was made and 20.880 litres of Indian made foreign liquor of Imperial Blue was recovered. Arjun Sahani was apprehended on spot and petitioner managed to flee away. Arjun Sahani is the father of the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the seizure list, it would appear that none of the villagers

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14499 of 2020(2) dt.03-09-2020 2/2 or independent witness put signature on the seizure list. The recovery of liquor is itself suspicious. Only police officials are made seizure list witnesses but from perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that it was petitioner who was selling liquor after keeping the same in his out house meant for keeping firewood but when the police came there for raid, the petitioner managed to flee away and his father was arrested.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

If the petitioner surrenders in the court below, learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of petitioner taking into consideration the fact that father of the petitioner has already been enlarged on regular bail. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T