The petitioner sought anticipatory bail against apprehension of arrest in a liquor recovery case under Section 47(A) of the Excise Act. The single-judge bench rejected the prayer.
Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 3125 of 2014
Mansukh Mahto .… Petitioner -VersusThe State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------For the Petitioner : : M/s. Rajiv Lochan For the State : : M/s. Anand Kr. Pandey, A.P.P. -------
6/ 05.01.2015. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with G.O.(EX) Case No. 76 of 2014, for the alleged offence under Section 47 (A) of the Excise Act.
The case relates to recovery of illicit liquor from the house of the petitioner.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, is hereby rejected.
(H.C.Mishra, J.)
D.S.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner.
Mansukh Mahto
The State of Jharkhand
H.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
