Shintu Rai @ Shintu Kumar @ Sintu Rai @ Sintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4954 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2023 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Shintu Rai @ Shintu Kumar @ Sintu Rai @ Sintu Kumar S/O Mahesh Ray Village- Shivrahan Chaturbhuj Tole Marhalla, Ps. Ahiyapur, Dist. Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Asha Devi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 77 of 2023 dated 28.10.2023 of the offences punishable u/s sections 30(a), 32 (ii) (iii), 36, 41 (I) (ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2016.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 243.75 of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from a truck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has three criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has been disclosed by the apprehended person. The petitioner is not the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4954 of 2024(2) dt.15-02-2024 2/3 owner of the said vehicle and the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. 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 enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4954 of 2024(2) dt.15-02-2024 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 77 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) jyoti/- U T