Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13191 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2024 Thana- KADIRGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Chandan Kumar S/O Rampravesh Prasad Resident of village - Balapar,P.SDhanarua, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-03-2025 Heard Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kadirganj P.S. Case No. 136 of 2024, F.I.R dated 26.08.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 42 liters of country made mahua liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R and the seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner,

2/4 altogether 42 litres of mahua liquor has been recovered from the possession of the co-accused person, namely, Rahish Kumar and on the basis of the disclosure made on behalf of the co-accused person, namely, Rahish Kumar, the name of the petitioner has been transpired in the present case. He further submits that except the disclosure made by the co-accused person, no other material has come during the investigation, which can suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C / Section 103 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor 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

3/4 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 and nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by the co-accused person, namely, Rahish Kumar, 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/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court of Excise-II, Patna in connection with Kadirganj P.S. Case No.

136 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i.

4/4 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.

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 petitioners. 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.) Jyoti Kumari/- U T