Laxmi Soni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55828 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDAN District- Banka ====================================================== LAXMI SONI W/O RAJESH SONI R/O VILLAGE BANDARBELA, POLICE STATION- BARHI (PADMA O.P), DISTRICT- HAZARIBAGH (JHARKHAND).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Mukherjee For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Chandan P.S. Case No.03 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3.

As per FIR, there is recovery of total 1173.825 liters of illicit foreign liquor from a pickup van bearing registration no. JH02BG-5199.

4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case, where, petitioner is a lady. It is submitted that nothing has been recovered from conscious physical

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55828 of 2024(2) dt.17-01-2025 2/2 possession of this petitioner rather the recovery has been made from the said pickup van. It is submitted that the petitioner is only registered owner of the pickup van, where, she has no knowledge about the illegal consignment of illicit liquor. 5.

Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State, opposes the prayer of bail of the petitioner and submitted that Section 76(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act prohibits to grant anticipatory bail.

6.

In view of the submissions, as made above and as recovery of illicit liquor has been made from the pickup van of the petitioner, who is registered owner and as the petitioner is also involved in one another case and as Section 76(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act prohibits to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, at present.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) S.Katyayan/- U T