Lal Jee v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45320 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2017 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Lal Jee Son of Shashi Singh Resident of village- Babhan Toli, Police StationFatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Umesh Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-09-2017 Heard Sri Umesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ram Naresh Ray, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

The sole petitioner, apprehending his arrest in Bodh Gaya P.S. Case No.189 of 2017 registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act,2016, has prayed for grant of bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is true that one Bolero vehicle was intercepted and from the said vehicle , huge quantity of Indian Make Foreign Liquor was recovered, but fact remains that the petitioner has no connection either with said vehicle or with the seized articles. It has been argued that it is a peculiar case that on secret information that the informant had stated that the petitioner with other persons

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45320 of 2017(2) dt.21-09-2017 2/2 were trying to transport huge quantity of Foreign liquor, a raiding team was constituted and raid was conducted and from the said vehicle, huge quantity of liquor was recovered. He submits that save and except suspicion, there is no material against the petitioner. However, considering the F.I.R., which suggests that after getting secret information, a raiding team was constituted and there was specific information regarding moving of Bolero vehicle, which has been seized and from the said vehicle, huge quantity of liquor was affected. In the F.I.R. it has also been indicated that after noticing the police about 50 yards before the police, two accused got down from the said vehicle and fled away.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is one of the named accused and there is huge quantity of recovery of liquor, there is no reason to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail. The petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) nawalkrs/- U T