Mukesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63075 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2021 Thana- KHODAWANDPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== MUKESH PASWAN Son of Ram Bahadur Paswan Resident of Village Khodawandpur, P.S. Khodawandpur, District - Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr. Shivam, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2022 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Parmanand Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Khodawandpur (Chhaurahi) PS Case No. 21/2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 188, 272, 273, 120(B) of the IPC and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

On the basis of secret information, the police recovered 422.22 litres of illicit liquor from a car standing near a place called Kunbhi and arrested one person who disclosed that at the instance of petitioner the illicit liquor has been brought and the petitioner is engaged in trade of illegal liquor.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63075 of 2021(2) dt.11-02-2022 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of statement made by the co-accused, namely, Milan Kumar who has been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 33751/2021 and one another co-accused, namely, Arun Yadav has also been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 46207/2021.

Having regards to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the material on record and the fact that the petitioner has got criminal antecedents of similar nature of offence and other serious offences, accordingly, this Court has reason to believe that if the petitioner is granted bail, he may again commit the offence. As such, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after six months from today, if the trial does not record any substantial progress.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U T