Pramod Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72980 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2024 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== Pramod Choudhary S/O Late Ganashi Choudhary R/O Village- Atarua, P.S.- Bhagwanpur (Teyai O.P.), Distt.- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 232 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Altogether 10 litres of country made wine has been recovered from the house of the petitioner.

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 the place of recovery or any trade of liquor. The allegation levelled against

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72980 of 2024(2) dt.24-10-2024 2/2 the petitioner is totally false and based on concocted facts. He was not apprehended from the spot. His name has been transpired in the present case due to enmity. The house from where the alleged recovery has been made is a joint family house and the same is inhabited by several family members and therefore, petitioner had no knowledge of keeping of the said liquor in the house. It is further submitted that petitioner has one criminal antecedent of similar nature of offence.

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

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as the alleged recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge him 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