Patna High CourtCR. MISC./29930/2025bail rejected

Mukesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-14Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29930 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Mukesh Yadav S/O Gopal Yadav @ Gopali Yadav Resident of VillageKhairatwa, P.S- Kuchaikote, Distt.- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Saurabh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 141 of 2024, dated 29.03.2024, lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022, pending before the Court of ADJ-IVcum-Special Judge Excise Court, Gopalganj.

3. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 14.400 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 not committed any offence. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is neither the driver, nor the owner of the bike. It is further submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29930 of 2025(2) dt.14-05-2025 2/2 petitioner was not apprehended from the spot, and his name has figured in this case solely on the basis of confessional statement of the apprehended person. Counsel also submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. However, it is fairly submitted that the petitioner does not have a clean criminal antecedent, as one criminal case is pending against him.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is one criminal case pending against the petitioner.

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.) Aman Kumar/- U