Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60792/2019bail rejected

Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2019-09-25Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60792 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2019 Thana- SARE District- Nalanda ====================================================== Manju Devi, Wife of Raj Kumar Dhari @ Raj Kumar Ram Resident of Village- Onda, Police Station- Sare and District- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No2 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umesh Lal Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

Petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Sare P.S. Case No.58 of 2019 (G.R. No.3720 of 2019), for the offence punishable under Section 30(a)(b)(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

The allegation against the petitioner is that police raided the house of the petitioner and recovered total quantity of 10 litres of illicit liquor from her house.

Mr. Manish Kumar No.2, appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case inasmuch as from perusal of the seizure list, it would be evident that independent witnesses have not signed the seizure list and procedure of Section 100 Cr.P.C. has not been followed by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60792 of 2019(2) dt.25-09-2019 2/2 police. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the fact that illicit liquor has been recovered from the house of the petitioner, 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 for grant of anticipatory bail. As such the present anticipatory bail application is rejected.

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