Patna High CourtCR. MISC./67084/2024rejected

Rahul Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-02-21Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67084 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Singh S/o- Lalan Prasad Singh Village- Rampur PS-Patepur Distt- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suruchi Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 21-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2022.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, total 60 liters of illicit liquor has been recovered from a Swift Dezire vehicle bearing registration no.BR-06CL-6385 and the petitioner is the registered owner of the said vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioner has got clean antecedent and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67084 of 2024(4) dt.21-02-2025 2/2

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is the registered owner of the said vehicle.

6. On perusal of the First Information Report, case diary and impugned order dated 12.08.2024, it appears that the petitioner is the registered owner of the said vehicle and total 60 liters of illicit liquor has been recovered from the said vehicle. As, Section 76 (2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act is attracted which bars the anticipatory bail. As such in view of the allegation leveled against the petitioner as well as in light of the judgment of the full bench of this Court in the case of Ramvinay Yadav v. State of Bihar PLJR 2019 (2), so I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T