Saroj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79464 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2021 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== SAROJ KUMAR SON OF HRIDAYA NAND SINGH R/O VILLAGESHEOPUR, P.S.- AGIAON (GARAHANI), DISTRICT- BHOJPUR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Diwakar, Advocate Mr. Shivam, Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sudharkar Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Anuranjan Patel, Advocate Mrs. Priya Kumari, Advocate Mrs. Pragya Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Lalan Kumar, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-01-2024 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.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 01 of 2021 dated 01.01.2021 for the offences punishable u/s 420 and 379 read with 34 of the IPC and Sections 30(a) and 38 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
4. As per the prosecution case, total 27 litres of illicit
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79464 of 2023(2) dt.05-01-2024 2/3 liquor was recovered from the motorcycle of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is accused in one more criminal case as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. The petitioner is owner of the said motorcycle but the said motorcycle was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of alleged occurrence. 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.
6. 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.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79464 of 2023(2) dt.05-01-2024 3/3 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 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, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 01 of 2021, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T