Munna Yadav@ Muna Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35857 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada ====================================================== Munna Yadav@ Muna Yadav S/o Umesh Yadav R/o Village- Pahwachak, P.S.- Rajauli, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Verma, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anish Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 8/2025 dated 05.01.2025 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 25 litres of illicit country-made liquor, 1000 litres of jawa mahua and two motorcycles were recovered from the Mahawar Jungle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has 10 criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35857 of 2025(2) dt.25-07-2025 2/3 concern with the alleged recovery rather the recovery has been made from an open place which is accessible to anyone. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. The co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by this court vide order dated 22.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 23344/2025. 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 arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35857 of 2025(2) dt.25-07-2025 3/3 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, Nawada in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 8/2025, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with the further conditions :- (i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

(ii) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bonds.

7. The application stands allowed.

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