Sonal Singh @ Raju Singh @ Rajeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27504 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Sonal Singh @ Raju Singh @ Rajeev Kumar Son of Babri Singh villageBhola Bigha, Ps- Aurangabad Mufassil, Dist- Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aman Vishal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Aurangabad Muffasil P.S. Case No. 84 of 2025, dated 11.03.2025, lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 1080 litres of illicit liquor 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 further submits that the contents of the FIR and the seizure list are contradictory, and this factual matrix, as it transpires from the allegations and the time mentioned in the seizure list,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27504 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2 indicates that the incident, as alleged, could not exist and is factually implausible. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean, as there are three criminal cases pending against the petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean, and all the cases against him are related to offences under the provisions of the Excise Act.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T