Dilip Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31459 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2017 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Vaishali ====================================================== DILIP CHAUDHARY S/o Sukh Nandan Chaudhary Resident of VillageDaulatpur, P.S.-Hajipur Sadar, District-Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vasant Vikas For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.A.G ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-01-2021 Heard Mr. Vasant Vikas, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Vaishali C2A Case No. 175 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a)/35(a)/37(b) and 37(d) of Bihar Excise (Prohibition) Amendment Act.
3. The allegation, as per prosecution case, is that 100 ML of illicit liquor has been recovered from the hotel of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case by the excise
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31459 of 2020(2) dt.06-01-2021 2/2 officials. Learned counsel further submits that no illicit liquor has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and two other accused persons, consuming illicit liquor in his hotel, were arrested by the excise officials at the time of raid.
5. Having regard to submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the material on record and the fact that the illicit liquor has been recovered from premises of the petitioner and keeping in view the Full Bench decision passed in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 431/2019, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory to the petitioner. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
6. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below and seeks regular bail, the same may be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced to the instant order. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T