Manish Yadav @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3017 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-228 Year-2024 Thana- HATHUA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Manish Yadav @ Manish Kumar S/O Rameshwar Yadav Resident of VillageBari Rai Bhan, Po- Bari Rai Bhan, PS- Hathua, Distt-Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Shahi For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Pushpa Sinha.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-02-2025
1. 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 Hathua Police Station Case No. 228 of 2024, dated 19.09.2024, disclosing offence under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the police, on secret information that the petitioner is going towards Nayan Gaon through Mirzapur Road on a motorcycle, having illicit liquor, reached near Repura pond and saw a motorcycle coming. The police tried to stopped the motorcycle but the person, riding the motorcycle, turned around and fled away after throwing the carton, tied on his motorcycle. On search of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3017 of 2025(3) dt.19-02-2025 2/2 carton, the police recovered 23.8 litres of illicit Bunty Bablee country-made liquor.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated by the police on the basis of his criminal antecedents and disclosure of his name by the passers-by. He further submits that the petitioner has got no concern with the illicit liquor, which was recovered lying on the road. He further submits that the illicit liquor has not been recovered from the vehicle and/or premises of the petitioner.
5. Regards being had to the submission advanced on behalf of the parties concerned and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has got five criminal antecedents of similar nature of offence, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √