Rajesh Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9097 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-629 Year-2024 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran ====================================================== Rajesh Singh S/O Late Suresh Bahadur Singh Resident of village - Chainpur, Police Station- Mashrakh, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Nikita Mittal, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025 Heard Ms. Nikita Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 629 of 2024, F.I.R dated 29.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 14.580 liters of foreign liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. She further submits that it appears from the FIR as well as seizure list that altogether 14.580 liters of foreign liquor has been recovered from the grocery shop of the petitioner. She further submits that nothing has been recovered from the grocery shop of the petitioner

2/4 rather the Police has planted the same and shown that the recovery have been made from the shop of the petitioner. She further submits that it appears from the seizure list that there is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./ Section 103 of B.N.S.S., 2023. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable.

6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019(2) P.L.J.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts that the petitioner has clean antecedent, nothing has been recovered from

3/4 conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery have been made from the shop in question and there is noncompliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./ Section 103 of B.N.S.S., 2023, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge Excise 2nd Saran at Chapra in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 629 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and with other following conditions:- i.

Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

4/4 iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U T