Chauhan Singh @ Chauhan Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2027 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-375 Year-2023 Thana- KARPI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

Chauhan Singh @ Chauhan Sharma son of Ram Sahai Sharma Resident of Village- Karpidih, P.S. - Karpi, District- Arwal. 2.

Avinash Kumar Son of Sudheshwar Ram Resident of Mohalla- Karpi Bus Stand, P.S.- Karpi, Disrtrict- Arwal.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-02-2024 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 Karpi P.S. Case No. 375 of 2023 dated 13.10.2023 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 97.5 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the road side.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner no. 1 has one criminal antecedent whereas the petitioner no. 2 has no criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2027 of 2024(2) dt.02-02-2024 2/3 antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioners was disclosed by the apprehended person. The petitioners are not the owner of the said tempo and the same was not being driven by the petitioners at the time of the alleged recovery. As per the F.I.R., the said recovery has been made from a tempo but as per the seizure list, the recovery has been made from the road side which creates doubt upon the prosecution case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners, 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 petitioners by submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2027 of 2024(2) dt.02-02-2024 3/3

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 Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court concerned, Jehanabad in connection with Karpi P.S. Case No. 375 of 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) Gautam/- U T