Patna High CourtCR. MISC./51505/2019rejected

Lal Mohan Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2019-08-19Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51505 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2019 Thana- AMNAUR District- Saran ====================================================== Lal Mohan Ram Son of Late Ganesh Ram Resident of Village- Amnour Harnarayan, Police Station- Amnour, District- Saran (Chapra) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhijeet Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 19-08-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Amnour P.S. Case No.167 of 2019 registered under Sections 272, 273 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

The S.H.O. of Amnour P.S. got information that Rinku Kushwaha and Lal Mohan Ram (petitioner) were illegally selling liquor. On such information, a raid was conducted in the beetle shop of Rinku Kushwaha and Indian made foreign liquor of different brands along with country made liquor was recovered. Immediately thereafter, the house of the petitioner was raided and from the courtyard of the house of the petitioner 105 litres of country made liquor kept in three gallons was recovered.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51505 of 2019(2) dt.19-08-2019 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and his family members are residing in Delhi to earn their livelihood. The petitioner has no manner of concern with the recovered liquor from the courtyard, but it appears that the S.H.O. got inputs about the petitioner also that he was selling illicit liquor and on such, a raid was conducted and 105 litres of country made liquor was recovered from the courtyard of the house of the petitioner.

Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U T