Sanjay Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.557 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2024 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Sanjay Ram son of Ganeshwar Ram Mohalla - Ambedkar Nagar, P.S.- Samastipur (Town), Dist.- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 12-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Samastipur Town P.S. Case No. 200 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section 30(a), of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that during the course of patrolling, the informant reached near the house of the petitioner located at Ambedkar Colony and upon seeing the police party two persons fled away. On suspicion, police personnel raided the house of the petitioner and recovered 7 litre of country made liquor kept in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.557 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2025 2/3 a plastic bag at the washroom gate. It is further alleged that, when the police person opened the washroom gate, a person was found hiding inside the washroom. Upon interrogation/inquiry, the apprehended person disclosed the name of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics and has committed no offence. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, however, it was recovered from washroom gate which belongs to his pattidar who has inimical relation to the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is having four criminal antecedents.

6. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that recovery was made from the washroom gate of the petitioner and having criminal antecedents of similar nature of offence, and appears to be habitual offender, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.557 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2025 3/3

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

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T