← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./65769/2019dismissed

Mahadeo Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2019-10-21Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65769 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-293 Year-2019 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

Mahadeo Yadav, Son of Late Dayaram Yadav, Resident of Village-Tamot Parsa, P.S.-Murliganj, District-Madhepura.

2.

Sanjeev Yadav @ Sanjeev Kumar, Son of Mahadeo Yadav, Resident of Village-Tamot Parsa, P.S.-Murliganj, District-Madhepura. 3.

Rajeev Yadav @ Rajeev Kumar, Son of Mahadeo Yadav, Resident of Village-Tamot Parsa, P.S.-Murliganj, District-Madhepura. 4.

Bipin Yadav @ Bipin Kumar, Son of Mahadeo Yadav, Resident of VillageTamot Parsa, P.S.-Murliganj, District-Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhay Shankar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amarendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 21-10-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Murliganj Case No. 293 of 2019, disclosing offence under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

As per F.I.R. police got an information of sale of illicit liquor by the petitioners, who are father and sons. On that information, police raided the house of the petitioners and recovered illicit liquor from the house of the petitioners. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that they have falsely been implicated in this case. Seizure list does not bear the signature of any family member of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65769 of 2019(2) dt.21-10-2019 2/2 petitioners.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, they may move before the learned court below for regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit, without being prejudiced by order of this Court, and if possible, be disposed of on the same day.

With the aforesaid, this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T