Allowed¶24

Umesh Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Jan 2024CR. MISC./71757/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Umesh Singh v State of Bihar; Patna High Court Cr. Misc. No.71757 of 2023 dt.16-01-2024; anticipatory bail granted; Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021 dated 03.03.2021, Begusarai; 2286 litres illicit liquor container truck; Sections 272, 273, 120B r/w 34 IPC; Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act; Section 76(2) bar overcome; not named in FIR; co-accused Raushan Kumar confessional statement; bail bond Rs. 20,000 with two sureties; section 438(2) CrPC conditions; counsel relied on Full Bench Ram Vinay Yadav v State of Bihar 2019 (2) PLJR 1089.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to be enlarged on bail in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks, on bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions under section 438(2) CrPC, in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021.

Umesh Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021 (offences under Sections 272, 273 and 120B read with 34 IPC and Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act; alleged recovery of 2286 litres illicit liquor), is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

The court enlarged the petitioner on anticipatory bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021: in the event of arrest/surrender within six weeks, on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Begusarai, subject to conditions under section 438(2) CrPC.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The court granted anticipatory bail in this Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act case notwithstanding the State's submission that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applied, having considered the facts and circumstances and the nature of the allegation against the petitioner (per counsel: not named in FIR; name emerged from co-accused Raushan Kumar's confessional statement; no incriminating article recovered from his conscious possession).

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Chandra Prakash Singh, J.), Cr. Miscellaneous No.71757 of 2023, order dt. 16-01-2024 — Umesh Singh v. The State of Bihar — arising out of Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021 dated 03.03.2021, Thana Baliya, District Begusarai (offences under Sections 272, 273 and 120B read with 34 IPC and Section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act; prosecution case alleges recovery of total 2286 litres of illicit liquor from a container truck). Anticipatory-bail application: counsel submitted petitioner falsely implicated, not named in FIR, name sprang up in confessional statement of co-accused Raushan Kumar, no incriminating article recovered from his conscious possession, and relied on Full Bench Patna HC ruling in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, 2019 (2) PLJR 1089, per which an anticipatory-bail application in a case under the Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act can be maintained despite the bar under Section 76(2) if no offence under that provision is made out from FIR allegations; A.P.P. opposed, contending the Section 76(2) bar applied. Court granted anticipatory bail: enlargement in event of arrest/surrender within six weeks on bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions under section 438(2) CrPC, to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Begusarai.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71757 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2021 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai

¶3

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

¶4

Umesh Singh S/O- Late Ram Sagar Singh Village- Vikrampur PsCheriyabariyarpur Dist- Begusarai

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shubhesh Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 16-01-2024

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

¶14

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶15

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶16

3. The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021 dated 03.03.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273 and 120B read with 34 of the IPC and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶17

4. As per the prosecution case, total 2286 litres of illicit liquor has been recovered from a container truck.

¶18

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71757 of 2023(3) dt.16-01-2024 2/3

¶20

that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is accused in two other criminal case as stated at para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, hence no case is made out. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of the co-accused Raushan Kumar. 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.

¶21

6. 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.

¶22

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71757 of 2023(3) dt.16-01-2024 3/3

¶24

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, Begusarai in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 59 of 2021, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶25

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶26

atul/-

¶27

U T

Umesh Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh 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

Bipin Kumar @ Bipin Chauhan Vs the State of Bihar

Mahesh Mistry @ Mahesh Mistri Vs The State of Bihar

Sharban Mandal Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Rajjak Vs The State of Bihar

Vicky Poddar @ Golu Poddar @ Krishna Poddar @ Golu Kumar @ Krishna @ Vicky Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar