Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary Department Of Excise, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna An

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2037 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF) =========================================================== Ranjeet Kumar, Son of Murari Lal, Resident of Mohalla - Mahalpar, Police Station - Bihar, District - Nalanda.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Department of Excise, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sadar Nalanda at Biharsharif.

5. The Officer Incharge of Deep Nagar Police Station, District - Nalanda.

6. The Investigating Officer of Deep Nagar P.S. Case No. 268 of 2017, District - Nalanda.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Vivek Prasad, G.P. VII =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 15-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Magic of the petitioner bearing registration no. BR21G9022 was seized by the police in connection with Deep Nagar P.S. Case No. 268 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30, 30(a), 35 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

By the impugned order dated 15.09.2017, the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (Excise), Nalanda, Biharsharif refused to release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner for the reason that Section 60 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 bars jurisdiction of the court in such matter.

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.2037 of 2017 dt.15-11-2017 2/3 The aforesaid order is under challenge in this criminal writ petition.

The State-respondents have challenged the prayer on the ground that the order of the court below is consistent with the law applicable, hence, requires no interference.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no purpose would be served by continued detention of the vehicle till completion of the criminal trial because pre-trial confiscation of the seized article is challenged in L.P.A. No. 1647 of 2015 (Baleshwar Roy vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) before a Larger Bench of this Court.

After hearing the parties, finding substance in the submission aforesaid, let the aforesaid vehicle be released in favour of the petitioner on execution of surety bond of Rs.2,00,000/- (rupees two lakhs) (not in the form of bank guarantee or cash) along with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below/authority concerned where the case is pending, with condition that the petitioner would not dispose of the said vehicle or put the same under encumbrance without permission of the authority concerned and shall produce as and when required by the Court. The release shall be subject to the final result of the pending L.P.A. aforesaid.

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.2037 of 2017 dt.15-11-2017 3/3 With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed of.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Kundan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 17.11.2017 Transmission Date 17.11.2017