Satish Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58693 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2024 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Satish Yadav S/O Nathuni Yadav R/O Village- Yogi Chhapra, P.S- Padrona, Distt.- Kushi Nagar (U.P.).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Nitu Kumari, Adv.

Mr. Y.K. Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Kotwa P.S Case No. 142 of 2024 dated 14.05.2024 registered for the offence punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 2583.44 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the truck.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The name of the petitioner was disclosed in this case by the coaccused, Arbind Yadav. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58693 of 2024(2) dt.04-10-2024 2/3 is owner of the said vehicle but the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. The coaccused persons have already been granted regular bail by this court vide order dated 10.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 49370 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58693 of 2024(2) dt.04-10-2024 3/3 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 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Kotwa P.S Case No. 142 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

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