VINAY VARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) Petitioner in the present case is seeking setting aside of the order dtd. 4/1/2019 passed by the learned Special Judge (Excise) Patna in Special Case No. 729 of 2017, arising out of Patliputra P.S. Case No. 148 of 2016 under Sec. 201 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Ss. 47(A) and 53(B) of the Bihar Excise (Amendment) Act, 2016 (in short 'Excise Act'). By the impugned order, the learned court has directed the investigating agency to reinvestigate the case.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Patliputra P.S. Case No. 148 of 2016 was registered on the basis of a news published in various daily newspapers on 26/4/2016. The news were published on the basis of a sting operation said to have been conducted by a private channel wherein a Member of Legislative Assembly, namely Vinay Varma (petitioner), was shown saying that he has brands of various liquors, further that he was shown giving offer to the team carrying out sting operation for drinking. It is alleged that when he was asked by the sting team, he stated that how can he throw when he has. It is further alleged that the petitioner said to have claimed that he has many brands in his village like Black Label, Black Dog. He allegedly invited the team for drinking at his village saying that if you want to drink then I can offer you. The petitioner allegedly said that liquor is available both at Patna and Narkatiaganj. It is further stated in the FIR that based on the said report, the officials of the Excise Department, Patna carried out a raid at the house of the petitioner on 26/4/2016 in between 8:00 am to 11:00 am but nothing was recovered from the premises. The informant alleged that the foreign liquors appeared to have been removed.