Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4530/2024bail granted

Pradeep Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-13Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4530 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2023 Thana- DEV District- Aurangabad ====================================================== PRADEEP YADAV SON OF IKARASI YADAV RESIDENT AT VILLAGEDHARHARA P.S.- KOTHI, DISTRICT- GAYA (BIHAR), PIN- 824210. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Nazir Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-02-2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed 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 Deo P.S. Case No. 268 of 2023, dated 17.11.2023 for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018.

4. As per prosecution case, total 5 litres country made Mahua wine was recovered from a motorcycle, driven by the co-accused Chhotu Kumar.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4530 of 2024(2) dt.13-02-2024 2/3 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. The petitioner is the owner of the said motorcycle but at the time of alleged occurrence, the said motorcycle was not being driven by the petitioner. The name of the petitioner was disclosed by apprehended co-accused namely Chhotu Kumar. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out against the petitioner. Petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4530 of 2024(2) dt.13-02-2024 3/3 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, Aurangabad in connection with Deo P.S. Case No. 268 of 2023 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