Amit Kumar @ Bittu @ Bittu Batla @ Bittu Balda v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78786 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1013 Year-2025 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Amit Kumar @ Bittu @ Bittu Batla @ Bittu Balda S/o Ramjanam Ray @Ram Ranak Ray R/o Village- Dakbunglow Road, Ward No.21, P.S- Hajipur Town, Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyam Bihari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-12-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Hajipur P.S. Case No. 1013 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases and allegation is of recovery of 1.61 litres of liquor along with four magazines, six live cartridges, and four mobile phone from the house of the petitioner.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78786 of 2025(2) dt.04-12-2025 2/2 recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on secret information which is the easiest way to implicate someone 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it is not a case where it is being alleged that only liquor was recovered rather allegation is of recovery of four magazines along with six live cartridges from the house of the petitioner and investigation is in its nascent stages.

6.

Considering the submission made by learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T