Neshar Khan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48703 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2021 Thana- RAUTA District- Purnia ====================================================== Neshar Khan S/o Late Salim Khan Resident of Azad Colony, Baldoria, P.S.- Dal Kola, District- Uttar Dinazpur, West Bengal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-08-2025 Heard Mr.Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rauta P.S.Case No.70 of 2021,FIR dated 10.07.2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272,273 and 34 of IPC and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

3. Recovery is of 312.480 liters of beer/ foreign liquor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. It appears from the FIR as well as the seizure list that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has

2/4 been made from the vehicle in question and one person, namely, Praveen Kumar was apprehended and he has not disclosed the name of the petitioner rather he has disclosed the name of one Santosh Kumar, who happens to be the driver of the vehicle in question and petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground that he is owner of the vehicle in question and it appears from the FIR that altogether 312.480 liters of beer/ foreign liquor was recovered from the vehicle in question. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr.P.C./Section 103 of BNSS, 2023. 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

3/4 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, even the apprehended person has not disclosed the name of the petitioner and petitioner has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground that he is owner of the vehicle in question, 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 Exclusive Special Judge, Excise,Court-II, Purnea in connection with Rauta P.S.Case No.

4/4 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 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) Nitesh/- U T