Dismissed¶19

Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Barka v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Feb 2025CR. MISC./722/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CR. MISC. No.722 of 2025, order dated 10-02-2025, Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh: anticipatory bail rejected for two brothers booked under Section 30(a) Bihar Excise Act in Sikandarpur PS Case No. 113 of 2024, Muzaffarpur; 43.02 liters illicit liquor allegedly recovered from motorcycle and scooty; petitioners denied conscious possession and ownership/driverhood of vehicles; State showed three and six similar criminal antecedents; bail prayer rejected on ground of accusation and long criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Considering the accusation and the long criminal history of the petitioners, the prayer for bail of the petitioners is rejected. ¶19

Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Barka Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.722 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2024 Thana- Sikandarpur District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Barka S/o Ramnath Singh R/o Mohalla- Sikandarpur Muktinath Dham, P.S.- Sikandarpur, DistrictMuzaffarpur

¶5

Avinash Kumar @ Nanki S/o Ramnath Singh R/o Mohalla- Sikandarpur Muktinath Dham, P.S.- Sikandarpur, District- Muzaffarpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 10-02-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶13

learned counsel for the State.

¶14

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered under Section 30(a) of Bihar Excise Act.

¶15

As per prosecution case, 43.02 liters illicit liquor has been recovered from motorcycle and scooty.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case merely on suspicion. Further nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. Petitioners are neither the driver nor the owner of the seized vehicles.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.722 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2025 2/2

¶18

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners by contending that petitioner no. 1 has got three criminal antecedents of similar nature and petitioner no. 2 has got six criminal antecedents of similar nature.

¶19

Considering the accusation and the long criminal history of the petitioners, prayer for bail of the petitioners is rejected.

¶20

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶21

utkarsh/-

Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Barka v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Barka v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zafar Imam Vs The State of Bihar

Mithlesh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Sandeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tunna Ram @ Tunna Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Singh @ Nitish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pyaru Ansari @ Imtyaj Ansari Vs The State of Bihar