Patna High CourtCR. MISC./58965/2024bail rejected

Sachin Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-11Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58965 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2024 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Sachin Kumar Son of Chandra Deo Mukhiya R/O Vill.- Basantpur, P.S.- Kundwachainpur, Dist.- East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-09-2024

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Dhaka Police Station Case No. 268 of 2024, dated 25.06.2024, disclosing offences under Sections 414/468 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the police, on secret information that one Tata Sumo is coming from Nepal carrying illicit liquor, reached at the place of occurrence. Upon seeing the police party two persons, driver and another sitting next to him, succeeded in fleeing away. Upon search, the police recovered a total 1390.2 liters of illicit liquor from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58965 of 2024(2) dt.11-09-2024 2/2 Tata Sumo Vehilce, bearing registration no. BR1PA-1533. Upon enquiry, the name of petitioner has been disclosed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to village politics. The name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of secret information. He further submits that illicit liquor has not been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and/or from the premises or vehicle belonging to him.

5. Regards being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has got five criminal antecedent of similar nature, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ashwani/- U T