Guddu Chaudhary @ Shiv Guddu Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69237 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2022 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Guddu Chaudhary @ Shiv Guddu Chaudhary S/O Vijay Chaudhary Resident of Village- Rahimpur, P.S.- Sonpur, District- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Atul Shankar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2023 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.

The accused/petitioner is named in F.I.R and apprehending his arrest in connection with Sonepur P. S. Case No. 321 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018. The allegation against the petitioner is involved in illegal trading of illicit liquor, where it is alleged that 10 Liters country made liquor was recovered from hut of the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that name of the petitioner surfaced in the present case on the basis of unknown villagers and also there is nothing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69237 of 2022(2) dt.01-05-2023 2/3 which may suggest that hut in question belongs to this petitioner and, as such, it can be safely said that the fact of this case does not make out any offence against this petitioner under Provision of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 and, as such, barrier of Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, not appears to be a barrier in given facts and circumstances, as per ratio laid down by our own High Court in the matter of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar, 2019 (3) BLJ 858. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that seizure list also appears doubtful being not supported by independent witnesses, rather same is supported by Bihar Homeguard personnels and, moreover, petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

Learned APP for the State, while opposing the prayer of anticipatory bail submitted that petitioner is named in the FIR and recovery of 10 liters country made liquor is alleged to be recovered from his hut, where investigation is yet to complete and at this stage, it cannot be said that no, prima facie, case is made out against this petitioner, as submitted.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69237 of 2022(2) dt.01-05-2023 3/3 Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith.

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) R.S.Sen/- U T