Mukesh Rai @ Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7775 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-487 Year-2023 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== Mukesh Rai @ Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Kumar Singh S/o Laxman Rai R/o Vill - Mahua Singh Rai, P.S. - Mahua, Dist. - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Anish Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 487 of 2023 dated 16.11.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 414 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 30(a), 32(i), 36(i) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 2918.88 litres of illicit India made foreign liquor was recovered from a truck and a pick-up-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 six criminal antecedents as stated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7775 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3 para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case only on the basis of secret information. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said vehicles and the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. Nothing 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7775 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 3/3 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, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Goraul P.S. Case No. 487 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure with further condition :- (i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T