Tetari Kunwar @ Kaila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2866 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2023 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Tetari Kunwar @ Kaila Devi W/O Late Ram Bachan Munda @ Late Bachan Munda Village- Baknaura Sunderganj, Ps. Rohtas, Dist. Rohtas 2.

Shanti Kunwar @ Shanti Devi W/O Late Shiv Munda @ Sibu Munda Village- Baknaura Sunderganj, Ps. Rohtas, Dist. Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case in connection with Rohtas with P.S. Case No. 261/2023 dated 27.09.2023 registered for the offence punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 7 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the thatched house of the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have one criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Nothing has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2866 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 2/3 been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners hence, no case is made out against the petitioners. The recovery is from the thatched house of the petitioners which has no gate on it, so it is accessible to anyone. The petitioners are ladies. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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 bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2866 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 3/3 Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court concerned, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection Rohtas with P.S. Case No. 261/2023 subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. This application stands allowed.

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