Bipul Singh @ Raju Singh @ Vipul Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35384 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2024 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Bipul Singh @ Raju Singh @ Vipul Singh Son of Harashu Singh @ Harashu Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Maharaja Hata Gali No. 3, P.S. - Ara Nawada, District - Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-07-2024 Heard Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ara Nawada PS Case No. 209 of 2024, FIR dated 24.03.2024, registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. 3.

Recovery is of 1500 mL + 900 mL of foreign liquor.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present. He further submits that according to the FIR and seizure list, 900 milliliter of English wine has been recovered from the house of the petitioner and 1500 milliliter of

2/4 English wine has been recovered from open road and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He lastly submits that recovery of 1500 milliliter of English wine has been made from roadside and recovery of 900 milliliter of English wine has been made from the house of the petitioner, however, petitioner is not the exclusive owner of the house in question and the house in question is the joint property of petitioner and his family members. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. 5.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand 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 pre-arrest 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.L.J.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 circumstances and mainly the facts that petitioner has clean antecedent, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and 900 milliliter of English wine has been recovered from the house, which is the joint property of the petitioner and his family members, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Excise Court No. 1st, Bhojpur at Ara, where the case is pending in connection with Ara Nawada PS Case No.

209 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and also the following conditions:- (i).

4/4 be cancelled by the learned trial Court.

(ii). 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.

(iii). And further condition that the learned trial Court 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 learned trial Court shall take steps 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) Shahnawaz/- U T