Manoj Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20140 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2019 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Manoj Sahni Son of Shital Sahni Resident of Village- Janki Nagar, P.S.- Sonbarsa, District- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

M/s. Pronoti Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 18-08-2020 Defect, as pointed out by the office, be ignored. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 287 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a), 38, 41, 42, 44 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Admittedly, neither petitioner was caught on the spot nor anything was recovered from his conscious possession and the name of petitioner was disclosed by one Afroj Mansoori who was caught on the spot. It is also an admitted position that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20140 of 2020(2) dt.18-08-2020 2/3 alleged recovery was made from a Tata Sumo vehicle. Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that no case of Excise Act is made out against the petitioner because there is nothing in the first information report to show that petitioner was involved in carrying the seized liquor and moreover, petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. Learned counsel of the petitioner further submits that having more or less similarly situated fact, one co-accused Ranjeet Sahni has already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this court. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer submitting that petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is not maintainable in the cases registered for the offences of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

Since nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and there is nothing in the first information report to show that petitioner was involved in trade of liquor and taking note of this fact that having more or less similarly situated fact, one co-accused has already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail, this anticipatory bail petition is allowed and it is ordered that petitioner, in the event of his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20140 of 2020(2) dt.18-08-2020 3/3 arrest/ surrender within eight weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IInd cum Special Judge, Excise Act, Sitamarhi in Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 287 of 2019, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) shahzad/- U T