Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46500/2024dismissed

Indrajeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-08Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46500 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2024 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1.

Indrajeet Kumar Son of Manki Ray R/O Village- Kolhrampur, P.S.- Barhara, Dist.- Bhojpur 2.

Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar Ray Son of Gautam Ray R/O Vill.- Dariyaganj, P.S.- Doriganj, Dist.- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Radha Krishna For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are seeking regular bail in connection with Ara Muffasil P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per allegation, 1750.680 liters of foreign liquor was recovered from the truck and the petitioners are said to be the driver and the cleaner of the said truck.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing was recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners are under custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46500 of 2024(2) dt.08-07-2024 2/2 29.04.2024.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the said liquor was recovered at the spot and the petitioners are named in the FIR.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances as well as the gravity of the allegation, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail, which is hereby rejected.

7. However, the petitioners, if so advised, may renew their prayer before the learned court below after framing of the charges.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T