Krishna Kumar Jha @Krishna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48389 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2019 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Samastipur ====================================================== KRISHNA KUMAR JHA @KRISHNA KUMAR Son of Late Kailash Jha Resident of Village- Dhurlakh, P.O.- Dhurlakh, P.S.- Samastipur Muffasil, District- Samastipur 847301 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raushan Mr. Sahil Kumar Mr. Atul Prakash For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner was not arrested from the spot and he came to be implicated on the ground that one Manoj was arrested with liquor and he was driving the motorcycle of the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then whether any offence under Section 30(a) of the Excise Act is made out in the nature of allegation as alleged when petitioner was not apprehended from the spot. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48389 of 2021(3) dt.31-01-2024 2/2 submitted that it cannot be presumed that petitioner being owner of the vehicle was in deemed possession of the liquor as deemed possession is now not an offence. It is next submitted that apart from the fact that petitioner was the owner of the vehicle, nothing has come during the course of investigation which could even remotely connect the petitioner with the offence.
4. The learned APP for the State rebuts the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that if what has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is true then the same can also be appreciated at the stage of the trial.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, seeks permission to withdraw the quashing application with liberty to raise all the issues raised herein at an appropriate stage in the trial.
6. Permission is accorded.
7. Accordingly, the present quashing application stands dismissed as withdrawn.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T