Patna High CourtCR. MISC./58097/2019bail rejected

Naresh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-16Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58097 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2019 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Naresh Kumar, Son of Ramchandra Mahto Resident of Village- Hanuman Nagar, Kanta Pirounchha, P.S.- Gaighat, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Devendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sucheta Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No.148 of 2019, for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 38 and 41 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The allegation against the petitioner, as mentioned in the FIR is that the police intercepted a Magic vehicle bearing Registration No.BR-06PD-6018 near Manu Raj Line Hotel and on search police recovered a total quantity of 14.25 litres of illicit foreign liquor and 35 litres of toddy. The driver of the Magic vehicle has been made accused.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and has falsely

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58097 of 2019(2) dt.16-09-2019 2/2 been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner in para-8 of the bail application has stated that petitioner is driver of the said vehicle and he drives vehicle on hire through his owner.

After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner was in possession of the vehicle being the driver of the same as stated by him in para 8 of the petition, accordingly, in view of Full Bench judgment passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.431 of 2019, I am not inclined to exercise my discretion under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. As such the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T