Triloki Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37850 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2024 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== 1.
Triloki Yadav S/O Kanji Yadav Resident of Village- Mahtbaniya, P.SUdwantnagar, District- Bhojpur. 2.
Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Singh S/O Kameshwar Yadav Resident of VillageMahtbaniya, P.S- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Udwantnagar P.S. Case No. 194 of 2024, F.I.R dated 12.05.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Recovery is of 152 liters of country made Mahua liquor from the Banas river side.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have clean antecedent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears
2/4 from the F.I.R and seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. They have been made accused on the basis of secret information. Petitioners have no concern at all with the alleged recovery. Except the secret information, no other material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. 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 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. 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 of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of
3/4 counsel for the petitioners.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners, the petitioners have clean antecedent and name of the petitioners transpired on the basis of secret information, 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 Exclusive Special Excise Judge, Court No.-II, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Udwantnagar P.S. Case No.
194 of 2024, 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. 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.
ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the
4/4 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 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) priyanka/- U T