Patna High CourtCR. MISC./50821/2021dismissed

Sholy Manjhi @ Sole Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

2022-02-16Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50821 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2021 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== SHOLY MANJHI @ SOLE MANJHI S/O RAM VILASH MANJHI Resident of Irki, P.S.- Jahanabad, District- Jahanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Bihari Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Veena Rani Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 16-02-2022 Heard the parties through virtual Court proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, office will place the matter before the Bench. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Excise Case No.180/2021 (Jehanabad P.S. Case No.154/2021) registered for the offence punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act, 2018.

Altogether 10 liters of country made liquor is said to have been recovered from the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. No incriminating article has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50821 of 2021(2) dt.16-02-2022 2/2 recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has no concern either with the seized liquor or any trade of liquor. There is no compliance of section 100 of the Cr.P.C. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as also mentioned in para-3 of this application.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner named above is hereby rejected.

Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T