Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18299 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-540 Year-2019 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

JITENDRA KUMAR SINGH @ JITENDRA SINGH Son of Lalan Singh Resident of Village- Mathiya, P.S.- Bikramganj, Dist.- Rohtas. 2.

Lalan Singh Son of Late Baleshwar Singh Resident of Village- Mathiya, P.S.- Bikramganj, Dist.- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sheikh Arkan Ahmad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 24-09-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State, through video conferencing. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 540 of 2019, registered under sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

As per allegation in the FIR, on secret information having been received a raid was conducted and it is stated that a total of 38.7 litres of IMFL in 215 bottles was recovered from just outside the newly constructed house of the petitioner by the side of the pond.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18299 of 2020(3) dt.24-09-2020 2/2 that the allegations as levelled in the FIR are false and concocted. No recovery of any incriminating article has taken place and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

By order dated 16.7.2020 antecedent report of the petitioners had been called for from the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas. As per the antecedent report received, the petitioners are FIR named in a case under the Bikramganj Police Station also registered under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail and, as such, the same is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) sushma/- U T