Akhilesh Kumar @ Akhilesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3504 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-459 Year-2023 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== AKHILESH KUMAR @ AKHILESH YADAV Son of Lalu Yadav Resident of Village- Mandai, Police Station (Okari), District- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ghoshi (Okari) P.S. Case No. 459 of 2023 dated 10.07.2023 for the offences punishable u/ss 30(a) and 30(d) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 20 litres of illicit desi wine was recovered from the two gallons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has four criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by local Chowkidar. It is further submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3504 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3 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. 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 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,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3504 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 3/3 Jehanabad in connection with Ghoshi (Okari) P.S. Case No. 459 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) Gautam/- U T