Bhuteli Chaudhary @ Vinay Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43989 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-331 Year-2023 Thana- TILAUTHU District- Rohtas ====================================================== BHUTELI CHAUDHARY @ VINAY KUMAR CHAUDHARY SON OF AWADHESH CHAUDHARY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - UTTAR PATTI, P.S. - TILAUTHU, DISTRICT - ROHTAS ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sangeeta Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Tilauthu P.S. Case No. 331 of 2023 dated 29.12.2023 for the offence/s punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 50 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the two motorcycles kept in the plastic bag.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not the owner of the motorcycle. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43989 of 2024(2) dt.06-09-2024 2/3 possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which he is one bail as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.04.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 25952 of 2024. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioner. 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 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 material available on record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43989 of 2024(2) dt.06-09-2024 3/3 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 the learned court concerned, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Tilauthu P.S. Case No. 331 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T