Ram Gulam Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30778 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2024 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.
Ram Gulam Mukhiya son of Late Bharat Mukhiya Village- Bhith PsBhagwanpur Dist- Begusarai 2.
Rohit Kumar son of Raj Kumar Mukhiya Village- Bhith Ps- Bhagwanpur Dist- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Bipin Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Pushpa Sinha.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-04-2024 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 Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 80 of 2024 dated 26.03.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 272, 273 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 30(a) and 30 (d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 10 litres of illicit country made liquor and liquor making apparatus were recovered from the Orchard.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30778 of 2024(2) dt.24-04-2024 2/3 implicated in this case. The petitioner no. 1 has four criminal antecedents whereas the petitioner no. 2 has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Local Chowkidar disclosed the name of the petitioners. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery rather the recovery has been made from an open place which is accessible to anyone. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners, 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 petitioners by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30778 of 2024(2) dt.24-04-2024 3/3 of the case as well as the material available on the record, 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 Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court concerned, Begusarai in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 80 of 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) Gautam/- U T