The Patna High Court declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The Court rejected the prayer, noting the nature of allegations and the fact that the petitioner owned the vehicle from which contraband was allegedly recovered.
Prayer for anticipatory bail is 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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3519 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-590 Year-2021 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
USHA KUMARI D/o Jawahar Ram R/v- Shiv Chak (Mishrichak), P.S.- Sahar, District- Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Upendra Kumar ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER
2 28-04-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 590 of 2021 registered for the offence under section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered form the conscious possession of this petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
Learned Adll. P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is the owner of the vehicle from which the alleged recovery has been made, and as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3519 of 2023(2) dt.28-04-2023 2/2
such, he does not deserve to be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the nature of allegations levelled and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
mcv/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case alleging offence under section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.
Whether ownership of the vehicle from which contraband was alleged to be found is a ground to deny anticipatory bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Usha Kumari
The State of Bihar
Arvind Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
