Arbind Kumar @ Sachin v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 935 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2023 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Arbind Kumar @ Sachin Son of Saryug Singh Resident of village- Jagdish Kamtaul, P.S.- Kudhani, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Namrata Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S Case No. 140 of 2023, dated 13.06.2023, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 414, 467 and 120(B) of the I.P.C. and under Sections 30(a), 32(1)(2), 36 and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 1522.77 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the truck and the car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle in question. The petitioner has no concern with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 935 of 2025(2) dt.28-02-2025 2/3 alleged recovery. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 19.07.2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29567 of 2024. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. Learned Counsel has relied on the judgment of Full Bench of Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089. The Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav (supra) has held that an application for anticipatory bail in a case arising out of Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained, despite the bar under Section 76 (2) of the Act, if on the basis of allegation made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 935 of 2025(2) dt.28-02-2025 3/3 enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 140 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. This application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Siwani/- U T