Pramod Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3014 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2023 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
PRAMOD RAY SON OF LATE HARI RAY R/O VILLAGE TAJPUR SARAIYA, P.S.- RAJEPUR, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI 2.
NAVEEN RAY SON OF SURESH RAY R/O- VILLAGE- MADHUAHA VRIT, P.S.- RAJEPUR, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI 3.
BIPIN KUMAR SON OF RAMBABU RAY R/O- VILLAGE- MAL MADHUAHA, P.S.- RAJEPUR, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI 4.
RAMBABU RAY SON OF JIYALAL RAY R/O- VILLAGE- MAL MADHUAHA, P.S.- RAJEPUR, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI 5.
SURENDRA RAY SON OF KISHUNDEV RAY R/O- VILLAGEMADHUAHA MAL, P.S.- RAJEPUR, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Mukul Sinha, Adv.
Mrs. Usha Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== 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 Rajepur P.S. Case No. 259 of 2023, G.R. No. 340 of 2023 dated 03.11.2023 for the offence/s punishable u/ss 272 and 273/34 of the IPC and 30(a), 32, 36 and 41(1) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3014 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 2/3
3. As per the prosecution case, total 65.340 litres of illicit foreign liquor kept in plastic sack was recovered from the bush.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The recovery was made from an open place that is accessible to anyone. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery. Co-villagers disclosed the name of the petitioners. The petitioner no. 1, 2 and 5 have no criminal antecedent and the petitioner no. 3 and 4 have one more criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Learned counsel has submitted that no case is made out against the petitioners. Learned Counsel has relied on the judgment of Full Bench of the Hon'ble Patna High Court in the case of Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar 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 material available on record, let the above
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3014 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 3/3 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Rajepur P.S. Case No. 259 of 2023, 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) guddukr/- U T