Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46882 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2025 Thana- EXCISE MAHUWA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar Son of Mahesh Rai Resident of Village - Narahar Sarai, P.S.- Karja, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vasant Vikas, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahua Excise P.S. Case No.07 of 2025, dated 14.01.2025 registered for the offences under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 1530 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from a tanker vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has two criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is not the owner of the seized vehicle and he has no concern with the alleged recovery.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46882 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 2/3 Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. The co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by this court vide order dated 25.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 37399/2025. 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 reported in 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 nature of allegation against the petitioner, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his 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) with two sureties of the like

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46882 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Mahua Excise P.S. Case No.07 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with further condition :- (i) The petitioner is 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 bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T