Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33014/2024bail granted

Govind Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-23Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33014 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2024 Thana- LAURIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Govind Chaudhary Son Of Ramagayachaudhary Resident Of Village- Nuniya Tola, Ward No. 02, PS- Lauriya Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sujeet Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 67 of 2024 dated 09.03.2024 for the offences punishable u/ss 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 15 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the dickey of the motorcycle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33014 of 2024(2) dt.23-05-2024 2/3 bail petition. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by local Chowkidar. The petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle but the said vehicle was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery hence, 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 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33014 of 2024(2) dt.23-05-2024 3/3 arrest/surrender 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, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 67 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T