Sunil Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37297 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2017 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== SUNIL RAJ, Son of Mahendra Yadav Resident of Village - Karma, P.S.- Telaiya Jhumri, District - Kodarma ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2021 As prayed for, let the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office vide its notes dated 19.12.2020, within four weeks of starting of Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 148 of 2017, registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, pending in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II-cumSpecial Judge, Nawada. The accusation is that in course of patrolling duty, the informant received information regarding accident of Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No. JH02AM-4779 at Madhopur

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37297 of 2020(2) dt.01-07-2021 2/2 Brick-kiln. Thereafter, informant along with other Police personnel reached there. On search, 52 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor recovered.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that, in fact, petitioner is the owner of seized vehicle bearing registration No. JH02AM-4779 from which 52 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor is said to be recovered. Further submission is that, in fact, petitioner has given his vehicle, on the request, to Sharwan Kumar for going to his relation and petitioner has no knowledge about carrying of alleged liquor. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail stands rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial Court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial Court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T