Govind Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79885 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-411 Year-2020 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.

GOVIND MUKHIYA S/O JAGESHWAR MUKHIYA VILLAGEPARIGAMA, WARD NO. 2, PS. CHORAUT, DIST. SITAMARHI. 2.

BIPIN KUMAR @ VIPIN KUMAR @ VIPIN PRASAD S/O BHARAT PRASAD VILLAGE- PARIGAMA, WARD NO. 2, PS. CHORAUT, DIST. SITAMARHI.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Parwej Khan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pronoti Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-01-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 411 of 2020 dated 30.12.2020 for the offence/s punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, total 243 litres of Nepali Gaurabh Saufi liquor was recovered near Samudayik Madarsa.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79885 of 2023(2) dt.08-01-2024 2/3 been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery. The apprehended co-accused person disclosed the name of the petitioners. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioners. Learned Counsel has relied on the judgment of Full Bench of the 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.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on record, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Sitamarhi in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 411 of 2020, subject to conditions as laid down under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79885 of 2023(2) dt.08-01-2024 3/3 section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. The application stands allowed.

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