Baiju Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33862 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2023 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== BAIJU PASWAN SON OF SURESH PASWAN R/O-DIHURI, P.S.- CHANDAUTI, DISTT.-GAYA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prithivi Raj Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-06-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 152 of 2023 dated 12.3.2023 registered for the offences punishable under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. As per the prosecution case, total 30 litres of Mahua liquor was recovered from the bank of Jamune River. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33862 of 2023(2) dt.24-06-2023 2/3 incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Hence no case is made out. Local 'Chowkidar' disclosed the name of the petitioner on account of previous enmity. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. 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.

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. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the nature of allegation, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33862 of 2023(2) dt.24-06-2023 3/3 learned Court concerned, Gaya in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 152 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This application stands allowed.

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