Binay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20154 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-491 Year-2022 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran ====================================================== Binay Kumar Son Of Mahesh Prasad Singh R/O-Arna Purab Tola, P.S.- Mashrakh, Distt.-Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ktitya Nand Jha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 491 of 2022 dated 21.10.2022 for the offences punishable u/s 30, 30(a) and 41 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 9.720 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the dickey of the motorcycle and 112.320 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the Mango Orchard.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has two criminal antecedents as stated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20154 of 2024(2) dt.29-03-2024 2/3 in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by local Chowkidar. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said vehicle and the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. Learned counsel has further submitted that the said Orchard does not belong to the petitioner. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20154 of 2024(2) dt.29-03-2024 3/3 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 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, Saran at Chapra in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 491 of 2022, 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