Manoj Yadav @ Manoj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13133 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2023 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== MANOJ YADAV @ MANOJ S/O MAHENDRA PRAKASH Resident of village- Nakhrola, P.S- Kherki Daula, Dist.- Gurgaon, Haryana ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sumit Shekhar Pandey, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 165 of 2023 dated 30.04.2023 of the offences punishable u/s 272, 273, 414, 34 of IPC and 30 (a), 36, 41 (i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2018.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 2306.360 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the container truck, motorcycle and magic van.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13133 of 2024(2) dt.04-03-2024 2/3 para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case merely on the basis of the owner of the said container truck. The petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle but 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13133 of 2024(2) dt.04-03-2024 3/3 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 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Gaighat P.S. Case No. 165 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