Manti Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31357 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2023 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.
Manti Devi Wife Of Ramu Das Resident Of Village - Jaysingdih, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Deoghar (Jharkhand) 2.
Ajay Kumar Das Son Of Ramu Das Resident Of Village - Jaysingdih, P.S. - Mohanpur, District - Deoghar (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-04-2024 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 Khaira P.S. Case No. 281 of 2023 dated 27.06.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 3.75 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31357 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 2/3 no. 1 is the owner of the said motorcycle but the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. The petitioner no. 2 is the son of the petitioner no. 1. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery. 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31357 of 2024(2) dt.25-04-2024 3/3 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, Jamui in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No. 281 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) Gautam/- U T