← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1194/2024bail rejected

Ganesh Thakur v. The State Of Bihar

2024-01-18Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1194 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-778 Year-2023 Thana- BARH District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

GANESH THAKUR, S/O SURENDRA THAKUR, R/O VILLAGE- EAST MALAHI, P.S.- BARH, DISTRICT- PATNA 2.

VICKY KUMAR, S/O LATE RAJU GOSWAMI, R/O MUHALLA- BARH BAZAR, P.S.- BARH, DISTRICT- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 18-01-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Barh P.S. Case no. 778 of 2023, registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

3. As per the prosecution case, 28.26 litres and 23.04 litres of liquor was recovered from the petitioner nos.1 and 2 respectively.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioners' possession who have been falsely implicated in the case because of their antecedents. They are in custody since 3.12.2023 and undertake to cooperate in the trial.

5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1194 of 2024(2) dt.18-01-2024 2/2 the State, who submits that both the petitioners have several antecedents against them including cases under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations of recovery of IMFL from the possession of the petitioners, as stated herein above, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Liberty is granted to the petitioners to renew their prayer for bail after six months.

(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T