Anil Rai @ Anil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47079 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2025 Thana- PATNA CITY CHOWK District- Patna ====================================================== Anil Rai @ Anil Yadav, Son of Ram Nath Rai @ Ramnath Ray, R/o- Ghagha Gali, P.S.- Chowk, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Pradhan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Spl. Case No. 749 of 2025, arising out of Chowk P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 for the offences registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner was arrested with 27 pieces of 180 ml. illicit liquor kept in his bag.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to his 17 criminal antecedents. No independent witness was present at the time of preparing the seizure-list. Charge has been framed against the petitioner. He is in custody since 23.02.2025. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47079 of 2025(4) dt.17-09-2025 2/2

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual criminal having 17 criminal antecedents of heinous nature including murder, dacoity, NDPS Act and Arms Act.

6. Considering submissions made on behalf of the parties, facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that petitioner has 17 criminal antecedents and there is recovery of illicit liquor from his possession, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J.) rakhi/- U T