Sri Chaudhary @ Ishwari Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57411 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2019 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.

SRI CHAUDHARY @ ISHWARI CHAUDHARY Son of Babulal Chaudhary 2.

Pushpa Devi Wife of Srichaudhary @ Ishwari Chaudhary Both are residents of Village - Meyar, P.S.- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rabindra Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 17-09-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Noorsarai P.S. Case No.202 of 2019 registered under Sections 30(a) and 37(b) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

The petitioners were found selling liquor in front of their house but the petitioners managed to flee away and the liquor was recovered from in front of the house of the petitioners.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.2 is the wife of petitioner No.1. She is a lady. Taking into consideration the fact that petitioner No.2 is a lady and wife of petitioner No.1, let the petitioner No.2,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57411 of 2019(2) dt.17-09-2019 2/2 above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No.202 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

So far as the case of petitioner No.1 is concerned, it was he who was selling the liquor and on raid, liquor was recovered from in front of the house of the petitioners. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner No.1 on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

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