Praduman Rai @ Ajit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19568 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2020 Thana- MAKER District- Saran ====================================================== PRADUMAN RAI @ AJIT KUMAR S/O LATE KAMESHWAR RAI R/O VILLAGE- KHAJUHATTA, P.O- BARWEN, P.S- DARIYAPUR, DISTT.- SARAN.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Matloob Rab ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Maker P.S. Case No. 115 of 2020, dated 17.09.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 30 & 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per prosecution case, 72 litres of illicit country made foreign liquor was recovered from a tempo.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition in which he is on bail. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by apprehended co-accused person.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19568 of 2024(2) dt.28-03-2024 2/3 People. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the seized tempo. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out against the petitioner. 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 APP 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 nature of allegation against the petitioner, let the 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19568 of 2024(2) dt.28-03-2024 3/3 concerned, Saran at Chapra in connection with Maker P.S. Case No. 115 of 2020, 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) Ranjeet/- U T