Dismissed

Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC20 May 2022CR. MISC./23203/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application as not maintainable. The court held that Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 imposes an embargo on entertaining Section 438 Cr.P.C. applications for offences under that Act. The petitioner was directed to remove case defects within one month.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is dismissed as not maintainable; petitioner to remove defects and file regular bail upon surrender.

Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23203 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2021 Thana- KURTHA District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

RANJEET KUMAR @ RANJIT KUMAR Son of Satyendra Yadav, Village - Garari Mathiya, P.O. - Telha, P.S. - Konch, District - Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 20-05-2022

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to

¶14

remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

¶15

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

¶16

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kurtha P.S. Case No. 15 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under section 30 (a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶17

So far as the maintainability of the bail petition is concerned, Section 76 (2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 makes an explicit embargo on entertaining the application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23203 of 2022(2) dt.20-05-2022 2/2

¶19

Since the provision of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is not applicable in respect of offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, as such, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed, as not maintainable. If the petitioner surrenders before the court below and files regular bail petition, it shall be disposed of on the same day without being prejudiced by this order. The learned court below may take notice of the fact that the petitioner is only owner of the vehicle wherefrom the alleged liquor was recovered. He is a person of clean antecedent and he is in Army.

¶20

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioner within the stipulated time mentioned hereinabove, failing which, the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

¶21

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

¶22

Mahesh/-

¶23

U T

Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar 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

Ghammu Kumar @ Ghamo Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Chandra Ram Vs Savitri Devi @ Rameshwari Devi

Akhilesh Yadav @ Akhilesh Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Ramfal Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Asha Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Dharamendra Ray Vs The State of Bihar