Chunchun Ray @ Chunchun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10787 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2023 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Chunchun Ray @ Chunchun Kumar S/O Ram Kripal Yadav R/O VillageHanuman Nagar, Patna, P.S- Rajepur, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Veena Kumari Jaiswal, 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 connection with Rajepur P.S. Case No. 303 of 2023 dated 24.12.2023 for the offences punishable u/ss 272, 273 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/ss 30(a), 32, 36 and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and u/s 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 229.155 litres of illicit Indian made foreign liquor and one country made gun were recovered from the field of the co-accused, Kameshwar Rai.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10787 of 2024(2) dt.27-02-2024 2/3 this case. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case merely on suspicion. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery rather the recovery has been made from the field of the co-accused, Kameshwar Rai. 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.10787 of 2024(2) dt.27-02-2024 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, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Rajepur P.S. Case No. 303 of 2023, 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) Gautam/- U T