Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30734/2025bail rejected

Mantu Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-15Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30734 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2024 Thana- SUPPI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Mantu Sah S/O Sonelal Sah Resident of Village- Mohinin Mandal, P.S- Suppi, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Suppi P.S. Case No. 155 of 2024, dated 10.09.2024, lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 132 litres of illicit wine has been made, which is the subject matter of the present case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and he has unnecessarily implicated in this case. Further submitted that his name has come in the present case by virtue of being the owner of the said

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30734 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 motorcycle wherefrom the recovery has been made.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner submitting that the petitioner seems to be a habitual offender as he has got six criminal antecedent in his account and out of six, five of them are of similar nature of excise case and above all the recovery has been made from his motorcycle.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) perwez U T