Rajjak @ Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74779 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2022 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria ====================================================== RAJJAK @ RAJAK SON OF ALAM @ MD. ALAM R/O VILLAGEFULBARI, BHORHA, P.S.- TARAGACHH, DISTRICT- KISHANGANJ ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhav Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-02-2023 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 Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through virtual court proceeding.

The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

As per the prosecution case, total 9 litres of Resham Lichi Nepali wine was recovered from a motorcycle. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74779 of 2022(2) dt.03-02-2023 2/3 has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is the owner of the said vehicle but the said vehicle was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of occurrence. The petitioner had no knowledge regarding the presence of liquor in the said vehicle. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 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 made in the FIR, no offence under the said provision is made out.

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. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74779 of 2022(2) dt.03-02-2023 3/3 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, Araria in connection with Sikti P.S. Case No. 172 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) guddukr/- U T