Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77239 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2024 Thana- RAJNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Yadav Mohan Yadav Resident of village - Rampatti,shreeganj , P.S.- Rajnagar , District - Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Adv .
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr.Ravi Prakash, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Satyendra Narayan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajnagar P.S. Case No. 240 of 2024 dated 29.06.2024 for the offences punishable u/ss 272, 273 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 225 litres of illicit Nepali liquor was recovered from the Alto car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77239 of 2024(2) dt.07-02-2025 2/3 bail petition. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of the co-accused, Purni Devi. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said vehicle and he has no concern with the alleged recovery. 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 six weeks from today, be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77239 of 2024(2) dt.07-02-2025 3/3 enlarged on 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, Madhubani in connection with Rajnagar P.S. Case No. 240 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T