Jantar Rai @ Antri Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46211 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2021 Thana- MEHANDIA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

JANTAR RAI @ ANTRI KUMAR Son of late Yogindra Rai Resident of Village - Naya panapar, Navdiyari, P.S.- Akilpur, Distt.- Patna. 2.

MADANDHARI Son of Prabhu Nath Rai @ Gandhi Rai Resident of Village - Khashpur, P.s.- Maner, Dist.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Ms. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 03-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

As per the prosecution case, on search 2186.64 litres and 2304.36 litres of liquor was recovered from specially made chambers inside the two trucks being driven by the two petitioners herein.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are professional drivers. They had no knowledge about the contents of the goods loaded. From perusal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46211 of 2021(2) dt.03-02-2022 2/2 of the FIR it would transpire that the liquor allegedly seized were in the sealed cavity and the trucks were loaded with iron rods etc. The petitioners could not have known about the same. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent and are in custody since 1.6.2021.

Heard learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case together with recovery of huge quantity of liquor from specially made chambers inside the two trucks being driven by these two petitioners, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and the application is rejected.

Liberty is granted to the petitioners to renew their prayer for bail on completing one year in custody. (Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U