Baudhu Kumar @ Baudhu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47687 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2018 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.

Baudhu Kumar @ Baudhu Kumar Singh, Aged about 38 years, Male, Son of Ganesh Singh, Resident of Village Iniyar, P.S. Mufassil (Lakho O.P.), District Begusarai.

2.

Chhotu Singh @ Chhotan @ Arun Kumar Singh, Aged about 37 years, Male, Son of Indradeo Singh, Resident of Village Iniyar, P.S. Mufassil (Lakho O.P.), District Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pankaj Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Atul Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2019 Heard both sides.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Ballia P.S. Case No.238 of 2018, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 30(a), 32 and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2016.

The SHO of Baliya P.S. disclosed that on secret information that a container filled with liquor was brought and many vehicles reached there for unloading the liquor from the container. Raid was conducted. The informant identified the petitioners and others who managed to flee away from the place where the container was parked. Huge quantity of liquor as well

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47687 of 2019(2) dt.01-08-2019 2/2 as vehicles were recovered from the place of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the names of the petitioners surfaced in the case on the basis of the identification made by the informant, SHO of Baliya P.S., and there is no other material to show that the petitioners had brought the container but it appears that the petitioners have got criminal antecedents and they are accused in many other cases which are also registered under different sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) S.KUMAR/- U T