Kamlesh Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28070 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2023 Thana- SAHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Kamlesh Ram S/O Sudama Ram R/O Village- Bakulha, P.S- Baria, Dist.- Balia (U.P).

... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Shahpur (Bahoranpur o.p.) P.S. Case No. 272 of 2023 dated 18.06.2023 of the offences punishable u/s 25(1-b)a, 26/35 Arms Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2018.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 70.02 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the motorcycle driven by the co-accused and one loaded pistol with one live catridge was recovered from the possession of the co-accused Rahul Rai.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28070 of 2024(2) dt.19-07-2024 2/3 this case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is owner of the said vehicle and the same was being driven by the co-accused Nitish Yadav at the time of the alleged recovery. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28070 of 2024(2) dt.19-07-2024 3/3 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, Bhojpur, in connection with Shahpur (Bahoranpur o.p.) P.S. Case No. 272 of 2023 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) Jyoti/- U T