Dhannu Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10281 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-776 Year-2020 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Dhannu Ram S/o Late Bablu Ram @ Bullu Ram @ Damma Ram R/o - Meena Bazar, Dom Khana, P.S. - Alamganj, Dist. - Patna 2.
Som Ram S/o Chhote Ram @ Damma Ram R/o - Meena Bazar, Dom Khana, P.S. - Alamganj, Dist. - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Nityanand Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 776 of 2020 (Spl. Case No. 7388/2020) dated 17.12.2020 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 52 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered in front of the house of the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have no criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10281 of 2024(2) dt.26-02-2024 2/3 antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioners was diclosed by local people. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery rather the recovery has been made from an open place which is accessible to anyone. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners, 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 petitioners 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 petitioners, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10281 of 2024(2) dt.26-02-2024 3/3 arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court concerned, Patna City, Patna in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No. 776 of 2020 (Spl. Case No. 7388/2020), 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) Gautam/- U T