Guddu Kumar Rai @ Guddu Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45647 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Guddu Kumar Rai @ Guddu Rai S/O Late Vakil Ray R/O Vill.- Rahimpur, P.S.- Sonepur, Dist.- Saran 2.
Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Rai @ Palu Rai S/O Dinesh Ray R/O Vill.- Rahimpur, P.S.- Sonepur, Dist.- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjeet Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kanhiya Kishor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 dated 14.02.2025 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 210 litres of illicit country-made liquor was recovered from the bank of Ganga river.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Local Chowkidar disclosed the name of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45647 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 2/3 the petitioners. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioners have one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 06.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29338 of 2025. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioners. 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 petitioners 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45647 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 3/3 above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Saran in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with further condition:- (i) The petitioners are 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 bonds of the petitioners are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T