Naushad Ansari @ Nausad Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25354 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2024 Thana- SRIPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Naushad Ansari @ Nausad Ansari S/O Md Kasim Ansari R/O Vill.- Selarkala, P.S.- Phulwariya, Dist.- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Shambhavi Suyesha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2025 Heard Mrs. Shambhavi Suyesha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jityendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection with Sripur P.S. Case No. 99 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 17.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition & Excise Amendment Act, 2016.

3. Recovery is of 01 liter of illicit liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. She further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather recovery has been made from co-accused persons namely

2/4 Ekramul Haque and Istikhyar Ahmad and the petitioner has been made accused merely on the ground that he is the owner of the motorcycle in question. She further submits that the apprehended co-accused persons are relatives to the petitioner and they had taken the motorcycle in question without information of the petitioner and they have been apprehended with the illicit liquor. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the petitioner. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C./ Section 103 of BNSS, 2023 No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the prearrest bail would not be maintainable.

6. This court is aware of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar reported in 2019(2) P.LJ.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant

3/4 of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused merely on the ground that he is the owner of the motorcycle in question, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order. be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge XIII-cum-Special Judge Excise Court No. 1, Gopalganj in connection with Sripur PS. Case No. 99 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:-

1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

4/4

2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T