Surendra Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11373 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2022 Thana- SHEIKHOPUR SARAI DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== Surendra Ravidas Son of Sidheshwar Ravidas Resident of VillageGagarnathpur (Naudiha), P.S.-Fatehpur, District-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Shekhopur Sarai P.S. Case No. 88 of 2022 dated 07.06.2022 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a), 32(2), 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act, 2018.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 203.750 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the Scorpio.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11373 of 2024(2) dt.27-02-2024 2/3 registered owner of the said vehicle. The said vehicle was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged occurrence. The petitioner had already sold the vehicle in question to one Barun Kumar Rakshit prior to the alleged occurrence. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case because the petitioner is the registered owner of the said vehicle. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioner. 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 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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11373 of 2024(2) dt.27-02-2024 3/3

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on record, 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, Sheikhpura in connection with Shekhopur Sarai P.S. Case No. 88 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) annpurna/- U T