Rajnish Kumar @ Rajnish Singh Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivjee Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP. ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 16-02-2024

¶13

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

¶14

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 418 of 2023 dated 26.09.2023 for the offence punishable u/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) of the IPC and u/s 30(a), 36(i), 41(i) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, total 3949.98 litres of illicit foreign liquor was recovered from the truck.

¶16

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 petitioner is neither

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5621 of 2024(2) dt.16-02-2024 2/3

¶18

the owner nor the driver of the said vehicle. The said vehicle was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The name of the petitioner has transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused Rakesh Kumar and Aarif Kalal. 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.

¶19

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

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material available on record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5621 of 2024(2) dt.16-02-2024 3/3

¶22

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, Hajipur in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 418 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶23

The application stands allowed.

¶24

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶25

annpurna/-

¶26

U T

Rajnish Kumar @ Rajnish Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnish Kumar @ Rajnish Singh 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

Rajan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Ganga Kumar @ Gangawa Vs the State of Bihar

Arvind Kumar @ Akhilesh Kumar @ Deolal Vs The State of Bihar

Indu Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar