Mahendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14995 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1069 Year-2023 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== MAHENDRA SAH S/O LATE RAMDEV SAH R/O VILLAGEBRAHMTOLA, P.S- TURKAULIYA, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs.Rashmi Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 1069 of 2023 dated 13.10.2023 for the offences punishable u/ss 30(a) and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 24.5 litres of illicit country made liquor kept in a sack behind the house of the co-accused, Pintu Shah. 10 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the bush near the house of the co-accused, Rajkumar Mahto.
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.14995 of 2024(2) dt.07-03-2024 2/3 this case. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by local Chowkidar. It is further submitted that the petitioner has 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 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 material available on the record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14995 of 2024(2) dt.07-03-2024 3/3 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, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 1069 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