Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 97893 (PAT)

Naresh Ram v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./33477/2025 · 2025-05-26

S B P Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33477 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2025 Thana- Raghunathpur District- East Champaran ====================================================== Naresh Ram son of Late Sukhari Ram Resident of village - Majuraha, Ps- Raghunathpur, Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Singh Shastri, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 26-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under sections 30(a), 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. 3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner was arrested on 21.3.2025 with a bag containing 22 liters of country made liquor and since then he is languishing in judicial custody. 4. From perusal of the records, it appears that in para-3 of the petition, it is mentioned that petitioner has no criminal antecedent whereas, it reveals from the last second paragraph of impugned order dated 22.4.2025 that a case Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33477 of 2025(2) dt.26-05-2025 2/2 bearing Turkaulia/Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 876 of 2021 is pending against the petitioner. Subsequently bail application was rejected by the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court no. 1, East Champaran, Motihari. 5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail and submitted that petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent from the Court to which learned counsel for the petitioner subsequently admitted that one case is pending against the petitioner. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the above facts, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, prayer for grant of regular bail stands rejected. sushma/- (S. B. Pd. Singh, J) U