Piyush Kumar Chhotu @ Chhotu @ Chhotu Kumar @ Piyush Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1007 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-352 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Piyush Kumar Chhotu @ Chhotu @ Chhotu Kumar @ Piyush Kumar Son Of Bipin Jha R/O Ward No. 41, Village- Bari Aighu, Mohaneghu, P.S.- Begusarai Muffasil, Dist.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR PATNA ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Saket Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar, 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 Begusarai Muffasil P.S. Case No. 352 of 2023 dated 19.06.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 56.25 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the Bansbadi of the coaccused, Ramdev Yadav.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has three criminal antecedents as stated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1007 of 2024(2) dt.31-01-2024 2/3 in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in this case on secret information. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery rather the recovery has been made from from the coaccused person. Nothing 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.

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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1007 of 2024(2) dt.31-01-2024 3/3 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, Begusarai in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 352 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