Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74727/2019rejected

Bhupendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2019-12-18Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74727 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2019 Thana- KISHUNPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== BHUPENDRA YADAV Son of Khushilal Yadav Resident of Village- Murli, Ward No.4, P.S.- Kishanpur, District- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhim Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kalyan Shankar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 18-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has filed the instant application for grant of bail in connection with S.T. Excise Case No.813 of 2019 [Kishanpur P.S. Case No. 238 of 2019 (District-Supaul)] registered for the offence punishable under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

As per the allegation in the FIR, the petitioner was arrested, selling liquor, and 1.440 litre of IMFL was recovered. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no recovery as alleged has taken place from either the person or the possession of the petitioner. The articles recovered were behind a Gumti. The petitioner has no concern with the said articles. He is in custody since 16.10.2019.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74727 of 2019(3) dt.18-12-2019 2/2 The application for bail was opposed by learned APP for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner was caught red handed selling liquor and he has two earlier cases under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act against him, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and as such the petitioner's application for bail is rejected. However, if so advised, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after completing six months of custody. (Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U T