Patna High CourtCR. MISC./58820/2024dismissed

Abhishek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-20Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58820 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2020 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Abhishek Kumar Son of Om Prakash Chaudhary Resident of village - Hathiyahi, P.S.- Piprakothi, District - East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024 Heard Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Total 25 litres of Spirit, 10 litres of country made liquor and a gas cylinder having weight 14.500 has been recovered form the hutment of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner or from the house. He submits that similarly situated co-accused has already been granted bail by a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58820 of 2024(4) dt.20-09-2024 2/2 coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.07.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42767 of 2023. He submits that the charge has been framed against the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner has three criminal antecedents of similar nature as stated in para-3 of the bail application and he is languishing in judicial custody since 11.06.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 132 of 2020.

7. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T