Vijay Jha @ Vijay Kumar Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16546 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2023 Thana- GHOGHARDIHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Vijay Jha @ Vijay Kumar Jha Son of Arjun Jha @ Arjun Za @ Arjun Kumar Jha Resident of Village- Dewardh, P.S.- Ghoghardiha, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baleshwar Kamat, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in para-10 of the bail petition in course of the day.

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ghoghardiha P.S. Case No. 188 of 2023 dated 20.12.2023 (G.R. No. 914/2023) for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, total 36 litres of illicit Nepali liquor was recovered from the motorcycle.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16546 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 2/3 this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is not the owner of the said vehicle and the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.16546 of 2024(2) dt.14-03-2024 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, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani in connection with Ghoghardiha P.S. Case No. 188 of 2023 (G.R. No. 914/2023), subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T