Shailesh Kumar @ Shailesh Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77500 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2024 Thana- PARSA District- Saran ====================================================== Shailesh Kumar @ Shailesh Kumar Rai Son of Vakil Ray Resident of Village - Anjani Mathiya, P.S. - Parsa, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s:

Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Parsa P.S. Case No. 269 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Altogether 89.120 litres of foreign liquor has been recovered from the house of the apprehended co-accused Balister Kumar.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has no concern either with the seized liquor or any trade of liquor.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77500 of 2024(2) dt.19-11-2024 2/2 The allegation levelled against the petitioner is totally false and based on concocted facts. His name has been transpired in the present case merely on the basis of the confessional statement of the apprehended co-accused person, who is full brother of the petitioner. He has falsely been implicated in this case at the instance of his enemy by planting the aforesaid recovery in his house. He has nothing to do with the alleged occurrence. He was not apprehended on the spot. It is further submitted that petitioner has two criminal antecedents of similar nature of offence that of the present case.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, place of recovery and criminal antecedents of the petitioner having similar nature of offence that of the present case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) divyanshi/- U T