Lal Mohar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5945 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2024 Thana- DAGARUA District- Purnia ====================================================== Lal Mohar Singh S/o Singasan Singh @ Sigasan singh Resident of Chandi, Ward no. 7, P.S.- Akhodhigola, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Md Fazle Karim, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dangarua P.S. Case No. 204 of 2024 dated 24.06.2024 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 281.145 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the Bolero vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. No incriminating article has been recovered from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5945 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 2/3 conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. The petitioner was not present at the time of alleged occurrence. The petitioner is the owner of the seized Bolero vehicle, the said vehicle was already sold by the petitioner to one Mohan Kumar. The co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 06.08.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 55262 of 2024. 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.5945 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 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, Purnia in connection with Dangarua P.S. Case No. 204 of 2024, 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) shivam/- U T