Rakesh Kumar Mahto @ Dhanna Seth v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40908 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar Mahto @ Dhanna Seth Son of Mishri Lal Mahto Resident of Village - Harsinghpur Lauttan, P.S.- Sakra, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 16-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of regular bail in connection with Excise Case no. 137 of 2020 arising out of P.R. no. 30 of 2020 registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. As per allegation in the F.I.R., 1495 litres of IMFL was recovered from the two pickup vans near a school in which the petitioner was a night guard.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no incriminating article has been recovered from his possession. He has no concern with the vehicles from which the seizure has taken place nor with the seized articles. He is in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40908 of 2020(3) dt.16-03-2021 2/2 custody since 06.09.2020 The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

Antecedent report of the petitioner had been called for which has been received. As per the antecedent report, the petitioner is an accused in ten other cases of which four cases are under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The same is rejected.

The petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after completing one year in custody.

(Partha Sarthy, J) shahzad/- U T