The Patna High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a case concerning the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The court held that mere ownership of the vehicle from which contraband was recovered did not entitle the petitioner to bail.
The prayer for anticipatory bail was 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.48250 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2022 Thana- CHEWARA District- Sheikhpura
====================================================== MD. RAJA Son of Late Mahmood Gaddi Resident of Village - Gawal Toli, Doranda, P.S.- Doranda, District - Ranchi and State - Jharkhand.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jawed Gaffar Khan, Adv. Mr. Jawed Gaffar Khan, Adv. Mr. Arun Kumar Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Priya Gupta, Adv Miss Sushmita Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shaheen Begum, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER
5 12-01-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Chewara P.S. Case No. 45 of 2022 registered for the offence under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act-2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report and he has been falsely implicated in this case merely because he is the owner of the vehicle in question from which the alleged recovery has been made. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48250 of 2022(5) dt.12-01-2023 2/2
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State opposes the prayer of bail and submits that petitioner is the owner of the vehicle from which the alleged recovery has been made. He therefore submits that petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is accordingly rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
anuradha/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest for an offence under the Bihar Prohibition Act as the owner of the vehicle from which contraband was recovered, deserves anticipatory bail.
Whether the fact that the petitioner was falsely implicated without criminal antecedent entitles him to the privilege of anticipatory bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Md. Raja
The State of Bihar
Arvind Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
