Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37840/2023dismissed

Raju Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-31Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37840 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2022 Thana- PATEPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== RAJU SINGH Son of Jagdish Singh Resident of village - Shahwajpur Puraina, P.S. - Patepur, Distt. - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Suruchi Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kanhaiya Kishore ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 31-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Vaishali (Patepur) P.S. Case No. 305 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, pending in the Court of learned Exclusive Special Prohibition and Excise Court (Second) cum Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur.

3. As per the prosecution case, 613.08 liters of foreign liquor is said to have been recovered from the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37840 of 2023(2) dt.31-07-2023 2/2 specific rather general and omnibus in nature. She submits that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the said illicit liquor is recovered from the house of the petitioner. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T