Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72104 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-484 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== 1.

Rahul Kumar Son Of Dhrub Narayan Singh @ Dhurv Narayan Singh @ Dhurab Narayan Singh R/O Village- Iniyar, Ward No.10, Near Kali Sthan, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Begusarai 2.

Dhrub Narayan Singh @ Dhurv Narayan Singh @ Dhurab Narayan Singh Son Of Late Jugeshwar Singh R/O Village- Iniyar, Ward No.10, Near Kali Sthan, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 29-11-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 484 of 2023 dated 17.08.2023, registered for the offence punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018, pending in the court of the learned Exclusive Special Judge Excise-1, Begusarai.

3. The petitioners are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case due to previous grudge. The allegations levelled against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. 20.50 liters foreign liquor in two white bags have been recovered from the house of the petitioner no. 2, Dhrub Narayan Singh and petitioner no.1 is son of the petitioner no. 2. He further submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72104 of 2023(2) dt.29-11-2023 2/2 that petitioner no.1 Rahul Kumar was met with a serious accident few time ago and due to the accident he sustained injury and also unable to move properly without the help of others. He further submits that petitioners are only accused in this case on the basis of false presumption of police team. Petitioners have clean antecedent.

4. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners is serious in nature, hence they do not deserve anticipatory bail.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

6. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order on the very date of surrender.

7. This application is accordingly dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) annpurna/- U T