Pukar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83832 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2023 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Pukar Paswan Son Of Laxman Paswan Resident Of Village - Basmanpur Agarwa, P.S. - Muffasil, District - East Champaran 2.
Muni Paswan @ Munnilal Paswan Son Of Laxman Paswan Resident Of Village - Basmanpur Agarwa, P.S. - Muffasil, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Indiwar Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 394 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a), 32, 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per F.I.R., allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were indulged in selling of liquor. The Police had recovered 06 litres of country made liquor and 60 litres of raw wine from the Bamboo orchard of one Rajendra Sah and the same was destroyed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83832 of 2023(2) dt.09-01-2024 2/2 petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent. Local Chaukidar had disclosed the name of the petitioners and submits that they had fled away from the place of occurrence.
5. Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail and also supported the allegation levelled in the F.I.R.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission of the parties and also the nature of the offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Hence, their prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Ranjeet/- U T