Patna High CourtCR. MISC./52769/2024dismissed

Adarsh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-02Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52769 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2024 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran ====================================================== Adarsh Kumar Singh Son of Saroj Pratap Singh Resident of Vill- Kharanti Chainpur, P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran at Chapra, Pin Code- 841424 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jeetendra Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 02-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 96 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2022.

3. As per allegation, on secret information the informant along with other police party was on patrolling duty, in the meantime, he saw two persons were coming on a motorcycle. Seeing the police party, the petitioner and coaccused dropped the sack and managed to escape from there. From the alleged sack 35 litres of spirit was recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52769 of 2024(2) dt.02-08-2024 2/2 that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He has further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is under custody since 26.04.2024.

5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he is involved in a series of cases of serious nature.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) SONALI/- U T