Babloo Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hans Lal Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 12-02-2024

¶13

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

¶14

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 848 of 2022 dated 19.10.2022 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶15

3. As per the prosecution case, total 10.2 litres of illicit Nepali liquor was recovered from the sack which was kept on the motorcycle and the said vehicle was being driven by the co-accused, Shiv Shankar who disclosed the name of the petitioner.

¶16

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3777 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 2/3

¶18

this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case only on the disclosure made by the apprehended co-accused, Shiv Shankar Kumar. The petitioner is not the owner of the said vehicle and the same was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. 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.

¶19

5. 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.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3777 of 2024(2) dt.12-02-2024 3/3

¶21

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances 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, Sitamarhi in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 848 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶22

7. The application stands allowed.

¶23

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶24

Gautam/-

¶25

U T

Babloo Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babloo Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadeem Ahmad Vs the State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Gupta Vs The State of Bihar

Dashrath Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar

Krishna Gopal Pandit Vs The State of Bihar

Manjit Yadav @ Mandeep Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Mullaji @ Sahil Raja @ Sajid Hussain Vs the State of Bihar