Kailendra Sah @ Kailendra Kumar @ Kalendra Sah @ Kalendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29441 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-661 Year-2023 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan ====================================================== Kailendra Sah @ Kailendra Kumar @ Kalendra Sah @ Kalendra Kumar Son of Balindra Sah Village- Sarsa Po- Bhanta Pokhar Ps- Siwan Muffasil (Dhanauti O.P.) Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Shahi, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Nazir Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 661 of 2023 dated 16.12.2023 of the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2022.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 761 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the dickey and seat of the Bolero Van.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has two criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29441 of 2024(2) dt.22-04-2024 2/3 transpired in this case only on the basis of suspicion. The petitioner is not the owner of the said vehicle and the same was not being driven by him 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 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.29441 of 2024(2) dt.22-04-2024 3/3 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Siwan in connection with Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 661 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