Patna High CourtCR. MISC./62971/2024dismissed

Md. Imran v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-11Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62971 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Begusarai ====================================================== Md. Imran S/O Md. Rahman Resident of Village- Papraur, ward No.- 12, P.SBarauni, Distt -Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sarvottam Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 30(a) and 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 253 of 2024.

3. As per prosecution case, there has been recovery of total 613.260 liters of foreign liquor from an E-ricksaw, which was being driven by the petitioner.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery of liquor. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62971 of 2024(2) dt.11-09-2024 2/2 17.07.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the FIR and he was apprehended on spot with the recovery of huge quantity of foreign liquor. He further submitted that the petitioner has also made accused in three more cases of similar nature. During investigation several witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties as also the fact the there been recovery of huge quantity of foreign liquor, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it within a period of six months, positively, failing which the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Arish/- U T