Binod Kumar @ Binod Sahni @ Vino v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53821 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2024 Thana- KANHAULI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Binod Kumar @ Binod Sahni @ Vino Son of Birendra Sahni R/V- PIPRA GHAT, P.S.- KANHAULI, DISTT.- SITAMARHI ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kanhauli P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024 dated 17.03.2024 of the offences punishable u/s 414 of the I.P.C. and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2018.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 1344.96 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the Scorpio and the Motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner is not the owner of the said seized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53821 of 2024(2) dt.27-09-2024 2/3 vehicles. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. Similarly situated co-accused has already been granted regular bail by this court vide order dated 20.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 54603 of 2024. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53821 of 2024(2) dt.27-09-2024 3/3 enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Sitamarhi in connection with Kanhauli P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024 subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. This application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Jyoti/- U T