Dismissed

Dilip Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Aug 2019CR. MISC./17651/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous application, the Patna High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a liquor smuggling case. Despite innocence claims, the vehicle belonged to the petitioner, leading the court to uphold a prima facie case and deny relief based on a Full Bench judgment.

What did the court decide?

Application for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail rejected.

Dilip Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Corruption | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17651 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2018 Thana- KAJRAILICHAK District- Bhagalpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

DILIP KUMAR, son of Jagadev Mahto, Resident of Village- Somnaha, P.S.Chackmensi, District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Alok For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suman Kumari Singh ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 13-08-2019 The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

¶12

with Kajraili P.S.Case No. 77 of 2018 registered under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶13

Allegation against the petitioner, as per FIR lodged by

¶14

SHO, Kajraili Police Station, is that on information, the police party intercepted a Tata 407 vehicle and upon seeing the police party, two persons from the vehicle fled away. It has further been alleged that upon search, a total quantity of 1183.68 litres illicit foreign liquor has been recovered from the vehicle.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated due to rivalry and village politics. Learned counsel further submits that no independent witness has supported the case of the prosecution except the members of raiding party.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17651 of 2019(4) dt.13-08-2019 2/2

¶17

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the vehicle, which was seized along with illicit liquor, belongs to the petitioner and no justification has been given by the petitioner regarding illicit liquor kept in his vehicle as such a prima facie case under the Act is made out against the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the Full Bench judgment passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 431 of 2019, I am not inclined to exercise my discretion for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner as such the same is rejected.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶19

sujit/-

¶20

U T

Dilip Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tippu Singh Vs The State of Bihar and Anr.

Naresh Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Bindu Bind Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Jamadar Vs The State of Bihar and Anr.

Lalit Shah @ Lalit Kumar Shah Vs the State of Bihar

Guj Mohan Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar