Gobardhan Sah @ Gobardhan Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70952 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-356 Year-2022 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Gobardhan Sah @ Gobardhan Kumar Sah Son Of Kokil Sah Resident Of Village - Rakai Badi, P.S. - Bhore, District - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR .. ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhramveer, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-11-2023 Heard Mr. Dhramveer, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Madan Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bhorey P.S. Case No.356 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 26.07.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

3. Allegation is of recovery of 40 liters 'Banti Babli countrymade wine recovered from the gunny bag of motorcycle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of the information furnished by the local people. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that from perusal of

2/4 the FIR and seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, rather recovery has been made from the motorcycle in question and the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery or the motorcycle in question. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C. No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioner under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner referring the provision contained in Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and submitted that the prearrest bail would not be maintainable. Further submits that petitioner carries two criminal antecedents other than the present one, but fairly submits that out of two cases petitioner is on bail in one case.

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) P.LJ.R. 1089. Having regard to the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment and the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court, for the limited purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of

3/4 counsel for the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts that petitioner is having clean antecedent, nothing has recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, name of the petitioner has been come on the disclosure made by the local people, 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 anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, II-cum-Special Excise Court No.01, Gopalganj in connection with Bhorey P.S. Case No.

356 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

4/4 for cancellation of anticipatory 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 criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of anticipatory 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) Prakash Narayan U T