Bittu Kumar @ Arnav Kumar Nirala @ Arnav Kumar @ Arnav Nirala v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73480 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2024 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Bittu Kumar @ Arnav Kumar Nirala @ Arnav Kumar @ Arnav Nirala S/O Lakshman Mahto R/O Village- Pateliya, P.S- Bibhutipur, Distt.- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Mirityunjay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sangeeta Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 73/2024 dated 10.03.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 28.500 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the hut of the coaccused, Shambhu Mahto.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner has no concern with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73480 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 2/3 the hut from which the recovery has been made. The other coaccused person has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 13.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.46291/2024. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. 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 eight weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73480 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 3/3 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 Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 73/2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with further 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 is liable to be cancelled.
7. This application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T