Pradeep Malik @ Pardeep Malik v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.684 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2020 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Pradeep Malik @ Pardeep Malik son of Mehar Singh Village-Jasrana, P.S.- Gohana Sadar, District-Sonipat(Haryana) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 31-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mohaniya (Mohonia) P.S. Case No. 334 of 2020 dated 20.10.2020 for the offences punishable u/ss 467, 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and u/ss 30(a), 36 and 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 7173.2 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from a truck.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is not named in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.684 of 2024(2) dt.31-01-2024 2/3 F.I.R. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case during the course of investigation. The petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said vehicle and the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out against the petitioner. The co-accused person has already been granted anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 06.06.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9281 of 2022. 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 petitioner by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.684 of 2024(2) dt.31-01-2024 3/3 case.

6. 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, Kaimur, Bhabua in connection with Mohaniya (Mohonia) P.S. Case No. 334 of 2020, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U