Lohichan Yadav @ Lohi Chand Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40520 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-179 Year-2025 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran ====================================================== Lohichan Yadav @ Lohi Chand Yadav son of Late Ramjiyawan Yadav Village- Ward No 16, Shivrajpur, PS- Nautan, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Mushtaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2025 Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mushtaque Alam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Nautan P.S.Case No.179 of 2025, FIR dated 18.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

3. Recovery is of 15 liters of illicit liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. From a bare perusal of the FIR as well as the seizure list, it appears that nothing incriminating has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made from the so-called straw house. The

2/4 allegation, as alleged in the FIR, is false and fabricated and in fact, the name of the petitoner has been transpired on the basis of the disclosure made by the local people. There is noncompliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner 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) PLJR 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 Counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean antecedent, nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather recovery has been made from

3/4 the so-called straw house, 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 learned Special Judge (Excise), First, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Nautan P.S.Case No.179 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner 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 his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her 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/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

4/4 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) anand/- U T