Vikram Kr. Verma @ Vikram Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47859 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2022 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

VIKRAM KR. VERMA @ VIKRAM KUMAR Son of Shiv Shankar Prasad Verma @ Shiv Shankar Prasad Resident of Village - Nawagarh, Chanderi, P.S.- Raj Dhanwar, District - Giridih (Jharkhand), At present resident of Village - Sadatpur, P.S.- Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur. 2.

Kanchan Kumari Wife of Vikram Kr. Verma @ Vikram Kumar Resident of Village - Nawagarh, Chanderi, P.S.- Raj Dhanwar, District - Giridih (Jharkhand), At present resident of Village - Sadatpur, P.S.- Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no. 2 is a woman and allegation is of recovery of 540 ml of liquor from the worship room of the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case, as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47859 of 2022(2) dt.04-11-2022 2/2 they were not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from their conscious possession, it is also submitted that petitioners had taken the room on rent when at the time when the search took place they were at Dhanbad in Jharkhand, it is also submitted that it may be a possibility that someone in their absence might have concealed the liquor in the pooja room, the Court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners but the learned APP for the State submitted that though it has been submitted that petitioners were at Dhanbad, but the same has not been pleaded.

Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, however if the petitioners appear before the learned trial court on or before 24.11.2022, the learned trial court shall dispose of the case on the same day keeping in mind that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no.2 is a woman and the alleged recovery is of a very meager amount of liquor. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Shivam/- U T