Ram Prakash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71422 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2022 Thana- LAUKAHI District- Madhubani ====================================================== RAM PRAKASH YADAV, S/o Tej Narayan Yadav, R/o Village- Mansapur Barhari Tole, P.S.- Laukhi, Distt- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ratanakar Jha, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rana Randhir Singhl, SPP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-01-2023 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

The petitioners is apprehending his arrest in connection with Laukhi P. S. Case No. 148 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

As per the prosecution case, on 16.06.2022 the police was on a patrolling duty. In the meantime, the petitioner was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71422 of 2022(2) dt.13-01-2023 2/3 coming on a Glamour motorcycle bearing registration no. BR50M-9540 and on seeing the police he fled away after throwing his motorcycle and a sack tied with his motorcycle. On search, total 34.800 litres of Nepali country-made liquor was recovered from the sack.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that no incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He is not the owner of the said motorcycle. It is also submitted that the name of the petitioner has sprung up on the basis of disclosure made by the local chaukidar due to village politics. The petitioner is accused in two more criminal cases, which are not related to the Excise Act, as stated in paragraph 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71422 of 2022(2) dt.13-01-2023 3/3 made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.

Learned S.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. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Jhanjhar in connection with Laukhi P. S. Case No. 148 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shakir/- U T