Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39976/2024rejected

Vikram @ Vikram Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-02Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39976 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2024 Thana- DEHRI TOWN District- Rohtas ====================================================== Vikram @ Vikram Sharma S/O Ramashankar R/O Village Kewara, Taluka, P.S. Bansdih, District-Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 02-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Dehri Town P.S Case No. 83 of 2024 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition & Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. As per prosecution case, total 1117.26 litres of illicit foreign liquor along with unregistered vehicle were recovered from the spot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has got clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this offence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39976 of 2024(3) dt.02-08-2024 2/2

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. From perusal of the F.I.R., impugned order and seizure list, it appears that the petitioner is the owner of the alleged bolero pick up vehicle and he has not registered his vehicle to escape from the authority of law to commit these offences and it seems that petitioner is a habitual offender.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioner would surrender before the trial Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, then the learned trial Court may consider the prayer for bail of this petitioner on the same day if possible, without being prejudice by this order.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Mayank/- U T