Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82830 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-408 Year-2023 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Son Of Mahesh Kamat Resident Of Village- Purani Durga Sthan @ Nagar Parisad Ward No. 11, Police Station- Supaul, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-01-2024 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 Supaul P.S. Case No. 408/2023 dated 27.05.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, total 10.485 litres of illicit liquor has been recovered from the mango orchard. The local chowkidar disclosed the name of the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82830 of 2023(2) dt.16-01-2024 2/3 that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is accused in five other criminal cases and he is on bail in all the aforesaid cases as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. The recovery is made from an open place which is accessible to anyone. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious 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.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82830 of 2023(2) dt.16-01-2024 3/3 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, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 408/2023, 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 bonds of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled. (Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T