Vasudev Koda v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38323 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2019 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== 1.

VASUDEV KODA son of Sahdeo Koda Resident of Village- Dargah Tola Kachhua, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai 2.

Shika Koda son of Baldeo Koda Resident of Village- Dargah Tola Kachhua, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai 3.

Gainu Koda son of Fagu Koda Resident of Village- Dargah Tola Kachhua, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-10-2021 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner nos. 2 and 3 were arrested during the pendency of this application, which has become infructuous.

In view of aforesaid submission, the application as against petitioner nos. 2 and 3 is dismissed as infructuous. The petitioner no.1 apprehend his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 30(a) (c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

So far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, learned counsel has submitted that as per allegation the police party raided the place of occurrence and recovered raw-materials and apparatus

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38323 of 2020(2) dt.25-10-2021 2/2 for manufacturing liquor. Thirty litres manufactured liquor was also recovered. The local Chaukidar apprised the informant that the petitioners and other accused persons were also indulged in manufacturing and selling the country-made liquor. Learned counsel has also submitted that the place from where countrymade liquor was recovered was not belonging to the petitioners. Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 makes an explicit embargo on entertaining the application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

Since the provision of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is not applicable in respect of offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, as such, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as not maintainable.

If the petitioner no.1 surrenders and seeks regular bail before the court below, the court below shall consider the same on its own merit.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T