Patna High CourtCR. MISC./69196/2024bail rejected

Jeewachh Kumar @ Jeevachh Kumar @ Jivach Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-12-04Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69196 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2020 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Jeewachh Kumar @ Jeevachh Kumar @ Jivach kumar S/O Ram Naresh Mahto R/O Village- Nandani, P.S- Mohiuddin Nagar, Distt.- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-12-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No.52 of 2020 lodged under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

3. As per the prosecution case, the total recovery of 3670.08 liter foreign liquor has alleged to be made from a truck, which is subject matter of the present case.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further submits that the petitioner is neither owner nor driver of the truck rather his name has come only by virtue of confessional statement of the co-accused persons.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 26.07.2024 having four criminal antecedent. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69196 of 2024(2) dt.04-12-2024 2/2 further submits that the petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

6. Counsel also submits that the person on whose confession petitioner's name has come, granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.09.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27357/2022.

7. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that it is true that the petitioner's name has been come by virtue of confessional statement of co-accused persons, but it is also true that criminal antecedent is against the petitioner and he is accused in 4 cases in which 2 cases are relating to excise matter.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected, but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail 6 months from today.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T