Vinod Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33544 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-703 Year-2023 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Vinod Kumar S/o Sunil Yadav R/o Vill- Billauri, P.S. and Dist- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-05-2025 Heard Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 703C of 2023, F.I.R dated 11.08.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 0.375 ml imperial blue foreign liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that nothing has

2/4 been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made from possession of coaccused person, namely, Sonu Kumar and he was sitting in the motorcycle in question. The petitioner name transpired merely on the ground that he is the registered owner of the said motorcycle but co-accused, namely, Sonu Kumar has taken his motorcycle for some urgent work and he was apprehended by the police alongwith the alleged liquor. The petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged liquor. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C / Section 103 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor 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 prearrest 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

3/4 behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been made accused merely on the ground that he is registered owner of the motorcycle in question, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on 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 Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum Exclusive Special Court-2, Excise Act, Lakhisarai in connection with Excise P.S. Case No.

703C of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i.

4/4 reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. 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 court below 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 court below shall take step 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) Suruchi/- U T