Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56299/2024dismissed

Amarjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-17Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56299 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-267 Year-2023 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Amarjeet Kumar S/o- Sunil Kumar Kushvaha Village- Jogauliya Tola Nanhakar Po- Rupani Ps- Madhuban Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Thakur Brajesh Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 267 of 2023 instituted for the offences punishable under Section 30(a), 41 and 48 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, F.I.R. has been lodged against five named accused persons from whom there is a recovery of 345.6 liters of illicit liquor from Scorpio Vehicle and 1028.16 of illicit liquor from pick-up vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that he has clean antecedent. He further submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56299 of 2024(2) dt.17-01-2025 2/2 petitioner has nothing to do with the illicit liquor. Neither the vehicle belongs to the petitioner nor the liquor. Petitioner's name has been figured in this case by the confessional statement made by the co-accused namely Bablu Kumar Singh.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner

6. From perusal of the impugned order dated 19.06.2024, it appears that police has not investigated about the involvement of the petitioner in this case and as per paragraph 50 of the case diary, no further investigation is pending against the petitioner. So, it appears that there is no apprehension of the arrest of petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner stands rejected as none maintainable. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Sunnykr/- U