Shio Lochan Chaudhari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39526 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2006 Thana -GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. DistrictBHABHUA (KAIMUR) ====================================================== Shio Lochan Chaudhari Son of Late Ram Deni Chaudhary Resident of Village -Chaudhari Market mohania, P.S- Mohania, District - kaimur at Bhabua.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 17-09-2016 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Excise Case No. 02/2006, registered for the offences punishable under Section 47(a) of the Excise Act.

According to prosecution report the house of the petitioner was raided and different brands of Indian made foreign liquor were recovered.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has rented out his house to the tenant who was running a liquor shop in that house. Petitioner is not at all responsible for recovery of the liquor from his house. It is further submitted that search and seizure was made in the year 2005, but the prosecution

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39526 of 2016 (2) dt.17-09-2016 2/2 report was submitted after one year of the search. No warrant was ever issued. Warrant of arrest was issued in the year 2016. It is further submitted that the tenant left out the house of the petitioner and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It appears that house of the petitioner was raided and from there huge quantity of foreign liquor was recovered. The case was lodged in the year 2006. Petitioner filed petition for anticipatory bail only after ten years.

Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Vinita/- U T