Kuldeep Sharma @ Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58751 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-316 Year-2013 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Nawada ====================================================== Kuldeep Sharma @ Rakesh Kumar S/O Dhaneshwar Sharma R/O VillageFulwariya, P.S- Rajauli, Distt.- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 22-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with G.O. Case No. 316 of 2013 registered under Section 47 (A) (F) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. On getting the secret information, police conducted raid at the marked place of occurrence and recovered 300 litres of country made Chulai wine and 1600 kg fermented Jawa Mahua solution and it is alleged that petitioner fled away from the spot. After investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner and cognizance has been taken on 28.11.2013 declaring petitioner as absconder.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58751 of 2025(2) dt.22-09-2025 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner has no concern with the seized materials and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The place of recovery is an open place easily accessible to anyone. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent 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 absconder for about 12 years and has involved in illegal business of illicit liquor. Therefore, he does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and conduct of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. His prayer for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected.

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) utkarsh/- U T