Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a prohibition offence case, arguing lack of possession over seized liquor and false implication. The single-judge High Court bench rejected the prayer.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66937 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2021 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Jamui
======================================================
MAHENDRA CHOUDHARY SON OF LATE PREMA CHOUDHARY R/O VILLAGE- SHIRA NAWADA (MURGIACHAK), P.S.- JAMUI, DISTRICTJAMUI
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amrendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. H.A. Khan ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER
2 16-12-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 30 (a) (c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner rather 20 liters of country made liquor and 200 kgs. of jawa mahua is said to have been recovered from the place of occurrence. Petitioner is said to have managed to escape from the place of occurrence. He has no concern either with the seized liquor or the place of recovery or any trade of liquor. He has been falsely implicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66937 of 2022(2) dt.16-12-2022 2/2
in this case at the instance of his enemy. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent of similar nature of the offence as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)
Trivedi/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail in a case under section 30(a)(c) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act.
Mahendra Choudhary
The State of Bihar
Anjani Kumar Sharan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
