Dismissed

Prakash Kumar @ Prakash Kuamr v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Oct 2020CR. MISC./24330/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An order in a criminal miscellaneous application seeking anticipatory bail. The petitioner was accused of illicit liquor manufacturing and storage alleging violation of Bihar Prohibition Act The court rejected the application citing prima facie case and a Full Bench precedent.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application rejected as a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner. The same is rejected.

Prakash Kumar @ Prakash Kuamr Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24330 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Prakash Kumar alias Prakash Kuamr, aged about 24 years, Gender -Male, son of Late Lakshman Prasad, Resident of village- Karkach Madhopur, Ward No.3, P.S.- Barauli, District- Gopalganj

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Indrajeet Bhushan For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Madhuri Lata, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 06-10-2020

¶11

Heard Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Madhuri Lata, learned A.P.P. for the State through video conferencing.

¶12

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Excise Case No. 83 of 2020 registered under Section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

¶13

The allegation against the petitioner is that the Police raided the house of the petitioner and recovered a total quantity of 6.400 liters of country made illicit liquor and 16.500 liters of Beer from the house of the petitioner.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case inasmuch as petitioner was not present in the house and seizure was not

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24330 of 2020(3) dt.06-10-2020 2/2

¶16

made as per the procedure prescribed under Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. and the same is not having signature of any independent witnesses or other inmates of the house. Learned counsel further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

¶17

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials available on record and the seizure list from which it appears that illicit liquor has been recovered from the house of the petitioner, a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner and in view of the Full Bench judgment of this court in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 431 of 2019 (Ram Vinay Yadav v. The State of Bihar), I am not inclined to exercise my discretion for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶19

praful/-

¶20

U T

Prakash Kumar @ Prakash Kuamr v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Kumar @ Prakash Kuamr 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

Vikash Anand Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Tasauwar @ Md. Tasouwar Hussain Vs The State of Bihar

Samiullah Miya Vs The State of Bihar

Sanju Ray Vs the State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Meena Kumari Vs the State of Bihar