Ram Vinay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29627 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-679 Year-2021 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== RAM VINAY KUMAR SON OF RAMPRIT YADAV @ RAMPRIT RAY R/O VILLAGE- MANIKPUR, P.S.- SARAIYA, DISTRICTMUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Devika Rani For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-09-2022 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, office will place the matter before the Bench. The petitioner apprehend his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 272, 273, 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 30(a), 32(2), 36, 41(10 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, Amendment 2018. Allegedly, 3458.880 liters of foreign liquor has been recovered from a truck. After seeing the police, the accused persons fled away from the spot.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. He has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29627 of 2022(2) dt.13-09-2022 2/2 been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has neither been apprehended on the spot nor any incriminating articles has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. The name of the petitioner transpired in the present case only on the basis of secret information. The said truck from which the recovery has been made does not belongs to the petitioner. Petitioner has no concern with the seized liquor. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent, which is also mentioned in para-3 of the bail application. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since huge quantity of liquor has been recovered, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

This application is accordingly, dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T