Brajesh Rai @ Nanhaki Rai @ Nanhak Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27303 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-920 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Brajesh Rai @ Nanhaki Rai @ Nanhak Rai Son of Chanar Rai villageBaburbani, Ps- sonpur, Dist- Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anant Kumar 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his/her arrest in a case in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 920 of 2024 dated 05.11.2024 for the offence/s punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 170 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the four Bhatties and 1000 litres of raw material was also recovered which was destroyed near the bank of Ganga river.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27303 of 2025(2) dt.04-07-2025 2/3 conscious possession of the petitioner. The recovery was made from an open place that is accessible to anyone. The name of the petitioner has transpired on mere suspicion. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has three criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioner. 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 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 material available on the record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his/her arrest/surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27303 of 2025(2) dt.04-07-2025 3/3 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, Saran at Chapra in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 920 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T