SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava
RAMDEV SAHANI – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
CR. MISC./69866/2019



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69866 of 2019

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2019 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran

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

1.

Ramdev Sahani, aged about 42 years, Male, Son of Baidnath Sahani,

Resident of Village- Jagatiya, P.S.- Pakaridayal, District- East Champaran.

2.

Pratap Sahani, aged about 32 years, Male, Son of Baidnath Sahani, Resident

of Village- Jagatiya, P.S.- Pakaridayal, District- East Champaran.

3.

Anil Sahani, aged about 26 years, Male, Son of Babulal Sahani, Resident of

Village- Jagatiya, P.S.- Pakaridayal, District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioners

:

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party

:

Mr. Indu Kumari Srivastava, A.P.P.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR

SRIVASTAVA

ORAL ORDER

2

27-11-2019

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with

Pakaridayal P. S. Case No. 177 of 2019, registered for the

offence punishable under Section 30(A) of the Bihar Excise and

Prohibition Act, 2016.

Police having got confidential information made raid

and recovered illicit liquor. Police claimed that petitioners were

selling illicit liquor and managed to escape from there, when hut

was raided.

Submission on behalf of the petitioners is that alleged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69866 of 2019(2) dt.27-11-2019

2/2

recovery has not been made either from possession or from

house of the petitioners. Moreover, there is nothing in the FIR to

show who disclosed the name of the petitioners.

Although, anticipatory bail petition for the offence

under the provision of excise act is not maintenable but in view

of the aforesaid submission, it appears that prima facie no

offence of excise act is made out against the petitioners and,

accordingly, this anticipatory bail petition is allowed and it is

ordered that the petitioners, above named, in the event of their

arrest/surrender within six weeks from the date of receipt of this

order to the court concerned, shall be released on bail on

furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

learned Special Judge, Excise Act, East Champaran, Motihari in

connection with Pakaridayal P. S. Case No. 177 of 2019, subject

to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.

Rajeev Kumar/-

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

U

T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top