Dismissed

Shyam Jha v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Nov 2021CR. MISC./37920/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous petition filed by petitioner seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 272, 273 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 and Section 30(a). Court rejected anticipatory bail but directed consideration of regular bail on surrender.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail rejected. If petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the court below.

Shyam Jha Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37920 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2020 Thana- PIYAR District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

SHYAM JHA Son of Madhusudan Jha Resident of Village- Loma @ Looma, P.S.- Gaighat, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Prasad Singh

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 23-11-2021

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

APP for the State.

¶15

The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Pear P.S. Case no. 116 of 2020 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Bihar Prohibition an Excise Act, 2016 and section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶16

As per allegation in the FIR, during course of patrolling informant has received a secret information about storage of illicit liquor in a locked house of the petitioner. Police team reached there and on search, in presence of co-villagers, door was broken by them and a recovery of 481.950 litres IMFL has been made and, accordingly, a seizure list was

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37920 of 2020(4) dt.23-11-2021 2/2

¶18

prepared.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has got no criminal antecedent. In fact, co-accused Ranjit Thakur was care taker of the alleged house. Neither the petitioner was arrested on spot nor any incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious physical possession.

¶20

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that the alleged house belongs to the petitioner, from where recovery of illegal liquor has been made, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected.

¶22

However, if the petitioner surrenders and prays for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the court below on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order of rejection.

¶23

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶24

sushma/- U

Shyam Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Jha v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Arabind Pal Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Akbar Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar

Molu Ansari@Malu Ansari Vs The State of Bihar