Ranjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.442 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2022 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== RANJIT KUMAR, Son of Raj Kishore Prasad, Resident of VillageMaksudpur, P.S.- Dhanarua, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin, 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), 36 and 41(i)(ii) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

As per the prosecution case, total 4733.58 litres illicit foreign liquor was recovered from two different vehicles and hut.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.442 of 2023(2) dt.03-02-2023 2/3 the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He has further submitted that the said recovery was made from two different vehicles, hut and an open land near the pond and the petitioner has no concern with the said vehicles, hut or alleged recovery. 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 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. 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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.442 of 2023(2) dt.03-02-2023 3/3 arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Patna in connection with Spl. Case No. 397 of 2022 arising out of Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 27 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This application stands allowed.

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