Amar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38839 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-251 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Samastipur ====================================================== Amar Kumar Son of Late Shiv Nandan Mahto, Resident of Village - Dekari, P.S. - Khanpur, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-10-2021 Let the defect(s) be removed within two weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course. Heard learned counsel Shri Ajay Kumar, appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP Shri Uma Shankar Prasad Singh appearing on behalf of the State. This application is for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Excise Case No. 251 of 2020, District- Samastipur registered under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The prosecution story in short is that on a secret information, a raid was conducted by officials of the excise department at the house of the petitioner from whose courtyard, four bottles of illegal liquor containing 375 ml each were recovered and seized. Further, the petitioner succeeded in fleeing away from the place.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38839 of 2020(2) dt.28-10-2021 2/2 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the seized liquor were not recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case by someone putting liquor in his courtyard due to enmity with co-villagers. In View of the Full Bench decision of this Court in case of Ram Vinay yadav Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in 2019(2) PLJR 1089 (F.B.), and the provisions under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, this application for anticipatory bail cannot be maintained. This application is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable.

However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. If he does so, his application for regular bail shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by rejection of the present application for grant of anticipatory bail by this Court.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T