Parmod Kumar@Parmod Kumar Yadav @ Pramod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57444 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2021 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== PARMOD KUMAR@PARMOD KUMAR YADAV @ PRAMOD KUMAR YADAV Son of Suresh Yadav @ Umesh Yadav Resident of Village - Parsawan Khurd, P.s.- Raushangaqnj, Distt.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dinesh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 04-03-2022 Heard the parties.

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 Raushanganj P.S. Case No.34 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable under section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Prohibition Act, 2018.

Altogether 20 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57444 of 2021(2) dt.04-03-2022 2/2 in the FIR. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. Petitioner has neither been apprehended on the spot nor any incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. Petitioner has no concern either with the seized liquor or any trade of liquor. The recovery is said to have been made from the house of the petitioner but the said house is a joint family house. 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. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner named above. The prayer for bail is rejected. Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T