Dharmendra Rajbanshi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72664 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2024 Thana- ROH District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

Dharmendra Rajbanshi Son of Sito Rajbanshi Village- Bhupesh Nagar, Psroh, Dist- Nawada 2.

Guddu Rajbanshi @ Nawlesh RajBanshi @ Nawlesh Kumar son of Bhagwat Rajbanshi Village- Bhupesh Nagar, Ps- roh, Dist- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2025 Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest connection with Roh P.S. Case No. 90 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 18.03.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. Recovery is of 30 litres of Mahua liquor as well as 4000 litres of jaggery mahua solution.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have clean antecedents and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears

2/4 from the F.I.R. itself that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possessions of the petitioners rather recovery has been made from the place of occurrence and the name of the petitioners has been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by local choukidar and except the aforesaid, no other material has come during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. Therefore, the recovery cannot be attributed to the petitioners. There is non-compliance with mandatory procedure prescribed for recovery under Section 100 of Cr. P.C./ Section 103 of BNSS, 2023 No case, whatsoever, would be made out against the petitioners under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners 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.

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

3/4 purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, is inclined to accept the submission of counsel for the petitioners.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and the fact that the petitioners having clean antecedents and the name of the petitioners have been transpired on the basis of disclosure made by local choukidar and nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order. be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Excise Court-2, Nawada in connection with Roh PS. Case No. 90 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:-

1. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.

2. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the

4/4 witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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) Ibrar//- U T