Patna High CourtCR. MISC./3177/2024bail granted

Rudal Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-05Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3177 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-539 Year-2021 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Rudal Sahni SON OF MISHREELAL SAHNI RESIDENT OF VILLAGEMADHOPUR CHIKNI, PS- KUDHNI, DIST- MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-02-2024 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 Excise P.S. Case No. 539 of 2021, dated 20.12.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a), 32(3) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 as Amended Act, 2018.

4. As per the prosecution case, total 533.160 litres of illicit foreign liquor has been recovered from the poultry farm of Gariban Sahni. The petitioner is the business partner of co-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3177 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 2/3 accused in trade of foreign liquor.

5. 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. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out against the petitioner. 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 APP 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 arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3177 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 3/3 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, Muzaffarpur in connection with Excise P.S. Case No. 539 of 2021, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. The application stands allowed.

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