Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh Pd Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72569 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2024 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Mukesh Yadav @ Mukesh Pd Yadav Son of Gagan Rai @ Gagandev Ray Resident of Village- Mathbanawari, P.S.- Piprakothi, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shanti Bhushan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara ====================================================== 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/her arrest in a case in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 171 of 2024 dated 13.08.2024 for the offence/s punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 455.400 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the cowshed of the coaccused Nawal Kishore Singh.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The said recovery was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72569 of 2024(7) dt.11-12-2024 2/3 made from the cowshed of the co-accused Nawal Kishore Singh. Mahal Chowkidar disclosed the name of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has four criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. 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 the record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his/her arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72569 of 2024(7) dt.11-12-2024 3/3 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, Motihari in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 171 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, with further condition/s:- (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 bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T