Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81994 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-838 Year-2023 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Chandan Kumar S/O Manoj Rai R/O Village- Sabalpur Chai Tola, P.SSonepur, Distt.- Saran. 2.
Hareram Kumar S/O Sharma Ray @ Sharmanand Ray R/O VillageSabalpur Chai Tola, P.S- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran. 3.
Deepak Kumar S/O Sharma Ray @ Sharmanand Ray R/O Village- Sabalpur Chai Tola, P.S- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran.
4.
Tishi Kumar @ Niraj Kumar S/O Manoj Rai R/O Village- Sabalpur Chai Tola, P.S- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran.
5.
Manoj Rai S/O Late Jagat Rai R/O Village- Sabalpur Chai Tola, P.SSonepur, Distt.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vasant Vikas, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-01-2024 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. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application with regard to the petitioner no. 4 i.e. Tishi Kumar @ Niraj Kumar who has already been arrested.
3. Permission is accorded.
2/4
4. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with respect to the petitioner no. 4.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
6. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sonepur P.S Case No. 838 of 2023 dated 04.09.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
7. As per the prosecution case, total 50.4 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the sand near the mango tree.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no concern with the place of occurrence or any seized articles. The petitioner nos. 1 and 5 have one criminal antecedent whereas petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners, hence no case is made out.
3/4 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.
9. 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.
10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioners, 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Saran at Chapra
4/4 in connection with Sonepur P.S Case No. 838 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Nilmani/- U T