Rekha Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38033 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2024 Thana- ISLAMPUR District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Rekha Devi Wife of Amarjit sapera Resident of Village- Ichahos Takiyapar, P.S- Islampur, Dist- Nalanda 2.
Dharamshila Devi Daughter of Shankar Sapera Resident of Village- Ichahos Takiyapar, P.S- Islampur, Dist- Nalanda 3.
Koshma Devi Daughter of Sanjay Sapera Resident of Village- Ichahos Takiyapar, P.S- Islampur, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-06-2024 Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2024, F.I.R dated 19.03.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.
3. Recovery is of 120 liters of wine.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of the
2/4 disclosure made by the co-accused, namely, Ranju Devi. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R as well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners and except disclosure, no other material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present occurrence. 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 petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners 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. Their 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, their Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioner.
3/4
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners and the petitioners have clean antecedent, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge Excise II, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Islampur P.S. Case No. 556 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:-
1. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
4/4
3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) Vanisha/- U T