Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30972/2022dismissed

Pappu Ray @ Pappu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2022-09-13Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30972 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2021 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Vaishali ====================================================== Pappu Ray @ Pappu Kumar S/O Late Lal Bahadur Ray R/O VillageDiwantok (South), Ward No. 06, P.S.- Gangabridge, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Gauri Shankar Gupta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 13-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a)/30(C) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather 10 liters of country made liquor, three drum and 500kg of Jawa Mahua are said to have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30972 of 2022(2) dt.13-09-2022 2/2 recovered from the place of occurrence. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application.

However, learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is the member of the syndicate who manufacturing the illicit liquor. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with C2A Case No. 220 of 2021.

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