Allowed

Amarjeet Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Aug 2020CR. MISC./20172/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition, the Patna High Court held that Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018 does not bar a Section 438 Cr.P.C. application when no prima facie case exists. The Court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner to be released on bail upon surrender within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail to be released on surrender within eight weeks by furnishing bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.

Amarjeet Sahni Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20172 of 2020

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-371 Year-2018 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Samastipur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Amarjeet Sahni Son of Chandeshwar Sahni Resident of Village - Nathudwar Char Tol, P.S.- Khanpur, District - Samastipur.

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶8

... ... Opposite Party

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 18-08-2020

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

¶12

Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Excise Case No. 371 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(A) & (D) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

¶13

The alleged recovery has been made from near a tree but the learned Special Judge has committed error on record while mentioning in the impugned order that alleged recovery was made from the house of the petitioner.

¶14

Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that nothing was recovered either from conscious possession or from house

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20172 of 2020(2) dt.18-08-2020 2/2

¶16

of the petitioner and petitioner does not have any criminal antecedent. He further submits that no doubt, Section 76(2) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act prohibits to entertain petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. but in the present case, no offence of Excise Act is made out against the petitioner and, therefore, in the aforesaid circumstance, petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is maintainable.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, this anticipatory bail petition is allowed and it is ordered that petitioner, in the event of his arrest/ surrender within eight weeks from today, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Excise Act, Samastipur in Excise Case No. 371 of 2018, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶19

shahzad/-

Amarjeet Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjeet Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Irshad Ali Vs the State of Bihar

Pintu Manjhi Vs the State of Bihar

Binod Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rajeev Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Kumar Singh @ Kanhaiya Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Binod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar