Patna High CourtCR. MISC./68092/2019bail rejected

Ajay Mahato v. The State Of Bihar

2019-11-06Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68092 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2019 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran ====================================================== AJAY MAHATO S/o Raghunath Mahto R/o village- Patkhauli, P.S.- Jogapatti (Sanichari), District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 06-11-2019 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Yogapatti(Sanichari) P.S. Case No.255 of 2019 registered under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The informant disclosed in his written report that he got secret information that Santosh Ram, Rudal Ram, Majid Alam and Ajay Mahato(the petitioner) illegally used to sell liquor and on such, raid was conducted. Santosh Ram was found selling liquor in front of his house and from his house liquor was recovered. When the raid was conducted in the house of the petitioner(Ajay Mahato), situated in village Patkhauli, he was found selling liquor nearby his house and he fled away after seeing the police. 6 liters of country made liquor was recovered by the side of the house of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68092 of 2019(2) dt.06-11-2019 2/2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The recovery was made from the outside of the house of the petitioner but it appears that recovery was made by the side of the house of the petitioner and when the petitioner saw the police, he managed to flee away. 6 liters of country made liquor was recovered by the side of the house of the petitioner.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T