Rajnish Kumar @ Rajnish Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61650 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- HASANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rajnish Kumar @ Rajnish Yadav Son of Naresh Yadav @ Ram Naresh yadav Resident of Village- Belaun Belain PS -Hasanpur Distt -Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Madhav Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Parmanand Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Hasanpur P.S. Case No. 67/2025 dated 29.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 156.975 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the hut of the coaccused, Ganga Prasad Yadav @ Ganga Prasad who disclosed the name of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61650 of 2025(2) dt.26-09-2025 2/3 possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has 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 15.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 45244 of 2025. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioner. 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 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 material available on record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61650 of 2025(2) dt.26-09-2025 3/3 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, Samastipur in connection with Hasanpur P.S. Case No. 67/2025, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, , with a 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 bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T