Patna High CourtCR. MISC./78123/2019dismissed

Niraj Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2019-12-09Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 78123 of 2019 Arising Out of P.S. Case No.-767 Year-2019 Thana- KANTI THARMAL POWER DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

Niraj Kumar Singh, (Male) aged about 30 years, Son of Uma Shankar Singh Resident of Village- Rampur Laxami, P.S.- Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur. 2.

Uma Shankar @ Uma Shankar Singh (Male) aged about 50 years, Son of Late Binda Singh, Resident of Village- Rampur Laxami, P.S.- Kanti, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Md. Arif, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Kanti PS Case No. 767 of 2019 dated 12.10.2019 instituted under Sections 30(a), 38 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

3. The petitioners along with three others are accused of dealing in illicit liquor and from their house, more than 778 litres of illicit foreign liquor has been recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they have been falsely implicated and the recovery is from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78123 of 2019 dt.09-12-2019 2/2 house and not the car of the petitioners. It was submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent and are in custody since 13.10.2019.

5. Learned APP submitted that such a huge recovery and the allegation that they were dealing in regular smuggling of liquor and the recovery being made from the house and the petitioners being father and son, there cannot be any false implication, as what has been stated is by the father, who would not falsely implicate his son.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T