Sandip Singh @ Sandip Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21450 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2023 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== 1.

SANDIP SINGH @ SANDIP KUMAR SINGH S/O BIHSWMOHAN SINGH R/O VILLAGE- AHIYAPUR, P.S- GOPALPUR, DIST.- GOPALGANJ, BIHAR.

2.

VIKASH SINGH @ VIKASH KUMAR SINGH S/O NARAD SINGH R/O VILLAGE- AHIYAPUR, P.S- GOPALPUR, DIST.- GOPALGANJ, BIHAR. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 298 of 2023, dated 12.12.2023 for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per prosecution case, total 765 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the tractor trolley.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner no. 1 has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail whereas petitioner no. 2 has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21450 of 2024(2) dt.02-04-2024 2/3 two criminal antecedents in which he is on bail as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioners was disclosed by the apprehended co-accused person. The petitioners are not the owner of the seized tractor. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners, hence no case is made out against the petitioners. 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 petitioners 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 petitioners, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21450 of 2024(2) dt.02-04-2024 3/3 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Gopalganj in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 298 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) Ranjeet/- U T