Mintu Singh @ Amar Singh @ Mintu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23290 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2017 Thana- MURAR District- Buxar ====================================================== Mintu Singh @ Amar Singh @ Mintu Kumar Singh S/o Hirday Singh R/o Village and P.O.- Adhiwari Patti, Chaugai, P.S. Murar, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vinod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Murar P.S. Case No. 14/2017 dated 09.03.2017 for the offences punishable u/ss 272 and 273 read with 34 of the IPC and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 1.08 litres of illicit Indian whisky was recovered from the possession of the co-accused Satish Singh.
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 para 3 of the bail petition. The apprehended person disclosed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23290 of 2024(2) dt.05-04-2024 2/3 name of the petitioner. No incriminating article 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 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 concerned,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23290 of 2024(2) dt.05-04-2024 3/3 Buxar in connection with Murar P.S. Case No. 14/2017, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. This application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T