Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2789/2025bail granted

Ranveer Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-31Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2789 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2021 Thana- BIHARIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== Ranveer Kumar S/O Gajendar Yadav R/O Vill.- Rajganj, P.S.- Bihariganj, Dist.- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Pooja Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2025 Heard Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Nagendra Prasad, earned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bihariganj P.S.Case No.161 of 2021,FIR dated 31.07.2021 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016

3. Recovery is of 450.615 liters of foreign liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made from Pick-up-Van

2/4 which was standing near the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged recovery of illicit liquor or the Pick-up Van in question and the petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground of suspicion and except the suspicion, no other material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. There is noncompliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./Section 103 of BNSS, 2023. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable.

6. This Court is aware of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court for the limited purpose of grant

3/4 of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of Counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean antecedent and nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII-cumSpecial Judge, Excise-II, Madhepura in connection with Bihariganj P.S.Case No.

161 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

4/4 for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T