Ramu Bhuiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84412 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2023 Thana- AMAS District- Gaya ====================================================== Ramu Bhuiya Son of Lakshman Bhuiyan Resident Of Village- Baliyari Tola, Laldih, P.S.- Amas, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Saurav Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-01-2024 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 Amas P.S Case No. 68 of 2023 dated 18.02.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a)(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, total 70 litres of illicit liquor, 1.5 quintal of jaggery (gud) and 100 kg of Mahua flower were recovered behind the house of the

2/4 petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The recovery was made from an open place which is accessible to anyone. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. No incriminating article has been recovered from the 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.

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.

3/4 7.

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 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, Gaya in connection with Amas P.S Case No. 68 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with further condition:

(i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

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

4/4