Pramod Kumar Pandey @ Pramod Pandey And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3232 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -212 Year- 2016 Thana -SAHPUR District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Pramod Kumar Pandey @ Pramod Pandey, Son of Sri Vishram Pandey,

2. Ravindra Pandey, Son of Sri Ramayan Pandey, Both are resident of village - Sonaki, P.S. Shahpur, District - Bhojpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Gopesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-02-2017 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail for offences punishable under Sections 47/53 of the Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have not been arrested on the spot rather names of the petitioners transpired in the confessional statement of other coaccused persons and no recovery has been made from them. Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Heard both sides. In this case there is recovery of 2760 bottles of foreign liquor from the possession of the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3232 of 2017 (2) dt.08-02-2017 2/2 petitioners and they have not been arrested on the spot. Considering seizure of huge quantity of liquor, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners and the same is rejected.

The petitioners are directed to surrender in the court below, i.e., learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, in connection with Shahpur P. S. Case no. 212 of 2016 and make prayer for regular bail which shall be considered taking into account the fact that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners, secondly, names of the petitioners transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused and dispose of the same preferably on the same day without being prejudiced by this order.

With the above observation this application stands disposed of.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sudip/- U T