Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 755 Patna
Judgement Date : 8 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31660 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2020 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Viru Singh @ Ashok Kumar, aged 43 years, Male, Son of Late Kamta Singh Resident of Village - Momindpur, P.S.- Hilsa, Distt.- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 08-02-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.
3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Hilsa PS Case No. 182 of 2020 dated 16.04.2020, instituted under
Sections 30(a)/56(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
4. The allegation against the petitioner is that from his
house 415 litres of wine, packing machine and 5000 printed
wrappers were recovered.
5. Learned APP raised a preliminary objection and
submitted that the application is not maintainable under Section Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31660 of 2020 dt.08-02-2021
76(2) of the Act which places bar for any application under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of
anticipatory bail for any offence under the Act. It was submitted
that prima facie a case is made out under the Act as the recovery is
from the house owned by the petitioner and the Court would not
go into the defence of the petitioner at this stage which is also not
required.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court
finds substance in the contention of learned APP.
7. Since the recovery is from the house of the petitioner,
an offence is made out under the Act and thus, the present
application for grant of pre-arrest bail is not maintainable.
8. Accordingly, the application stands disposed off as not
maintainable.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR U T
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!