Laddu Kumhar @ Laddu Kumar @ Prakash Kumar Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Laddu Kumhar @ Laddu Kumar @ Prakash Kumar Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner, if arrested or surrendering within six weeks, to be enlarged on 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, Siwan, in connection with Hussainganj (M.H. Nagar) P.S. Case No. 26 of 2024, subject to conditions under section 438(2) CrPC.

Issue for consideration

Whether an anticipatory bail application in a case under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act is maintainable despite the bar under Section 76(2) of the Act, where on the FIR allegations no offence under that provision is made out. +1 more

Court's answer

The anticipatory bail application was entertained and allowed notwithstanding the State's plea that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applied, thereby accepting maintainability in line with the Full Bench ruling in Ram Vinay Yadav (supra).

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to be enlarged on anticipatory bail, upon arrest/surrender, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Key takeaways

The anticipatory bail is to operate in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of the order.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, S. 30(a) — alleged recovery of 5.42 litres of illicit liquor kept in a bag from in front of the petitioner's house; defence that recovery was from an open place accessible to all and no conscious possession — objection by State that bar of S. 76(2) of the Act applies — counsel relied on Full Bench ruling in Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar 2019 (2) PLJR 1089 (anticipatory bail maintainable under the Act despite S. 76(2) bar if no offence made out on FIR allegations) — application allowed: petitioner to be enlarged on anticipatory bail upon arrest/surrender within six weeks on bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of like amount each, subject to S. 438(2) CrPC conditions (Chandra Prakash Singh, J).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22758 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2024 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan

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

LADDU KUMHAR @ LADDU KUMAR @ PRAKASH KUMAR S/ORAJENDRA KUMHAR R/O- VILLAGE- HASANPURA, P.S.HUSAINGANJ (M.H. NAGAR), DIST.- SIWAN.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR, PATNA

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arbind Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

ORAL ORDER

2 04-04-2024

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his/her arrest in a case in connection with Hussainganj (M.H. Nagar) P.S. Case No. 26 of 2024 dated 23.01.2024 for the offence/s punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

As per the prosecution case, total 5.42 litres of illicit liquor kept in a bag was recovered in front of the house of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The recovery was made

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22758 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 2/3

from an open place that is accessible to anyone. Local Chowkidar disclosed the name of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Learned counsel has submitted that 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 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.

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.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on the record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his/her arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22758 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 3/3

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, Siwan in connection with Hussainganj (M.H. Nagar) P.S. Case No. 26 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

guddukr/-

U T