Pinku Singh @ Sujit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7008 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-280 Year-2023 Thana- HATHUA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Pinku Singh @ Sujit Singh Son of Ganesh Singh R/o Bara Badhiya, P.s. - Barauli, Distt. - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sucheta Yadav ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Hathua P.S. Case No. 280/2023 dated 01.12.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 375.480 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the Maruti Suzuki car.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has four criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7008 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 2/3 no case is made out. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said vehicle. 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 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Gopalganj in connection with Hathua P.S. Case No. 280/2023,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7008 of 2024(2) dt.17-02-2024 3/3 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) atul/- U T