← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./64034/2024dismissed

Manish Kumar Yadav @ Manish Gope v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-20Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64034 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-550 Year-2024 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Manish Kumar Yadav @ Manish Gope Son of Late Jagdish Yadav Resident of Mohalla- Pathri Ghat, Devi Asthan, B.N.R. Road, PS.- Alamganj DistrictPatna (Bihar), PIN-800007 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shakib Ayaz For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-09-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 550 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise(Amendment) Act, 20122.

3. Allegedly, 130 liters of country-made liquor was recovered from house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is under custody since 08.08.2024.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64034 of 2024(2) dt.20-09-2024 2/2 opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has eight criminal antecedents.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances as well as the gravity of the allegation and also the fact that the petitioner has strong criminal antecedents, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail, which is hereby rejected.

7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after nine months from today. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T