Raushan Chaudhari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53495 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-660 Year-2025 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Raushan Chaudhari S/o Sunil Chaudhari, R/o Village- Mohan ganj, P.SBarun, District - Aurangabad, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Rupa Kumari, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Excise P.S. Case No.660 of 2025 instituted under Sections 30(a) & 32(3) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, there is recovery of 71.100 litres of country made liquor from the seat and trunk of the car bearing Registration No. BR-01-AS-7847.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to his criminal antecedents. He further submits that the petitioner is owner of the seized car and his car was broken down in the way and he went to bring Mechanic in the meantime, the car was seized. He had no knowledge about the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53495 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/2 seized liquor which was kept in his car. He further submits that petitioner has three criminal antecedents in which he is on bail and he undertakes to cooperate in the investigation and trial.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender and he has got thee criminal antecedents of similar nature. Therefore, petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties as well as the criminal antecedents of similar nature of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is, hereby, rejected. (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) Ritik/- U T