Sothi Devi @ Surthi Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24870 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2024 Thana- BARSOI District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.

Sothi Devi @ Surthi Devi Wife Of Rangila Choudhari Resident Of VillageBaje Dogachh Bin Tola, Ps- Barsoi (KACHNA Op),Dist- Katihar 2.

Tiliya Devi @ Telima Devi Wife Of Hiraman Choudri @ Hiraman Choudhari Resident Of Village- Baje Dogachh Bin Tola, Ps- Barsoi (KACHNA Op),Dist- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Asha Devi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case in connection with Barsoi (Kachna O.P) P.S. Case No. 29/2024 dated 28.01.2024 registered for the offence punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 325 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the bamboo orchard of Dinanath Choudhary.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have no criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24870 of 2024(2) dt.09-04-2024 2/3 antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners hence, no case is made out against the petitioners. The petitioners are ladies. The recovery was from an open place which is accessible to anyone. 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 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 bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24870 of 2024(2) dt.09-04-2024 3/3 Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court concerned, Katihar in connection with Barsoi (Kachna O.P) P.S. Case No. 29/2024, 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