Jimmi Kumar @ Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18279 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-909 Year-2023 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Jimmi Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Son Of Binod Sahani @ Vinod Sahani Resident Of Village- Near Lane Of Brahamasthan Ward No. 17, Ps- Town, Distt- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yugal Kishore, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 909 of 2023 dated 02.11.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 483 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the motorcycle and the two thela.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18279 of 2024(2) dt.19-03-2024 2/3 para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of the co-accused, Vicky Kumar. It is further submitted that the recovery has been made from the motorcycle and the two thelas but the said vehicles does not belong to the petitioner. 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.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18279 of 2024(2) dt.19-03-2024 3/3 above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender 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, Muzaffarpur in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 909 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