Dismissed

Tufani Uraon v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Feb 2022CR. MISC./36465/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application as not maintainable. The Court held that under Section 76(2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016, Section 438 Cr.P.C. does not apply to offences under this Act.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as not maintainable; petitioners directed to remove defects and surrender for regular bail before the lower court.

Tufani Uraon Vs The State of Bihar — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36465 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2020 Thana- FALKA District- Katihar

¶3

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

¶4

TUFANI URAON S/O- Harendra Uraon R/O- Dumar Dhangar Tola, P.S. - Falka (Pothia), Distt. - Katihar.

¶5

Dhanjeet Uraon @ Manjeet Uraon S/O Shore Uraon R/O- Dumar Dhangar Tola, P.S. - Falka (Pothia), Distt. - Katihar.

¶6

Manoj Uraon S/O- Gopal Uraon R/O- Dumar Dhangar Tola, P.S. - Falka (Pothia), Distt. - Katihar.

¶7

Dipak Uraon S/O- Buchkan Uraon R/O- Dumar Dhangar Tola, P.S. - Falka (Pothia), Distt. - Katihar.

... ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

¶12

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajeev Nayan

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

3 16-02-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to

¶17

remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State through video conferencing.

¶19

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Falka P.S. Case No. 91 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.

¶20

Section 76 (2) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36465 of 2021(3) dt.16-02-2022 2/2

¶22

Act, 2016 makes an explicit embargo on entertaining the application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

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.

¶24

If the petitioners surrender and seek regular bail before the court below, the court below shall consider the same on its own merit.

¶25

Office shall ensure that all defects are removed by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

¶26

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J)

¶27

SONALI/-

¶28

U T

Tufani Uraon v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tufani Uraon 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

Vijay Yadav @Vijay Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmendra Kumar Vs Guria Devi

Ramanand Tanti Vs The State of Bihar

Dhanik Lal Kushwaha @ Dhanik Lal Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ratnesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Sangita Devi Vs The State of Bihar