Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30713/2025bail rejected

Tuntun Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-15Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30713 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran ====================================================== Tuntun Sahani S/o Anirudh Sahni @ Anirudh Mallah R/o Vill.- Fulwariya, P.S. - Manjhi, District - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 15-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025, dated 21.02.2025, lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution, total recovery of 129.6 litres of illicit wine 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 for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. Further submitted that neither the petitioner is owner nor the driver of the said vehicle from where the recovery has been made. His name has been figured out only on the basis of disclosure made by the co-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30713 of 2025(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 accused, Dinesh Sahni. Learned counsel fairly submits that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent of similar nature.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner submitting that the petitioner has got one criminal antecedent of similar nature.

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.

7. However, in case the petitioner surrenders within six weeks from today, the learned Trial Court will consider his application for regular bail on its own merit particularly ingredients of the Excise Act, preferably on the same day without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Dr. Anshuman, J) perwez U T