← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./59416/2018dismissed

Dheeraj Chouhan @ Ajay Chouhan And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2018-10-06Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.59416 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2018 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas ======================================================

1. Dheeraj Chouhan @ Ajay Chouhan, S/o- Vijay Chouhan

2. Purnwasi Chouhan, S/o- Davarika Chouhan Both R/o Village- Sundarganj, P.S. Rohtas, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Sri Deovind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Sri Dinesh Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-10-2018 Heard Sri Deovind Kumar Singh , learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Dinesh Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

Two petitioners, apprehending their arrest in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 193 of 2018 registered for the offence under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, have prayed for grant of bail in the event of their arrest or surrender.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the petitioners have falsely been implicated due to village politics, however on going through the materials available on record particularly statement made in paragraph - 3 of the petition it is evident that petitioner no. 1 was earlier also made

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.59416 of 2018(3) dt.06-10-2018 2/2 accused in a case relating to offence under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. So far petitioner no. 2 /Purnwasi Chouhan is concerned, he was also accused in an another case i.e. Rohtas P.S. Case No. 130 of 2016 of -course relating to other offences. In this case petitioners were made accused on an accusation that they were preparing illegal country made liquor. Considering the nature of accusation and antecedent of both the petitioners, there is no reason to entertain the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) praful/- U T