Dewanti Devi Vs the State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Dewanti Devi Vs the State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Enlargement of petitioner on anticipatory bail upon arrest/surrender within six weeks, on bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under section 438(2) CrPC, court concerned Bhojpur at Ara.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Bihiyan P.S. Case No. 91 of 2022 for offence punishable under s.30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, is entitled to anticipatory bail notwithstanding the bar under s.76(2) of the Act raised by the A.P.P.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the facts, circumstances and material on record, the petitioner is to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest or surrender within six weeks, on furnishing a bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, Bhojpur at Ara, in connection with Bihiyan P.S. Case No. 91 of 2022, subject to conditions under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Key takeaways

The anticipatory bail application stands allowed.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act - s.30(a) offence; s.76(2) bar. Petitioner Dewanti Devi, apprehending arrest in Bihiyan P.S. Case No. 91 of 2022 (dated 16.03.2022, District Bhojpur) for offence punishable under s.30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, sought anticipatory bail. Prosecution alleged recovery of 121 litres of illicit country-made liquor from a motorcycle owned by the petitioner but driven by her husband at the time of the alleged occurrence. Counsel asserted her innocence, absence of criminal antecedents, and reliance on the Full Bench judgment in Ram Vinay Yadav vs. State of Bihar, 2019 (2) PLJR 1089, represented by counsel as holding that anticipatory bail applications in cases arising out of the Bihar Excise and Prohibition Act are maintainable despite the s.76(2) bar where the FIR allegations disclose no offence under the said provision; the A.P.P. contended that the s.76(2) bar applied. The Court, considering the facts, circumstances and material on record, allowed the application without expressly addressing the s.76(2) bar in its own words: enlargement on anticipatory bail on bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, arrest/surrender within six weeks, subject to s.438(2) CrPC conditions, court concerned Bhojpur at Ara.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7657 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2022 Thana- BIHIA District- Bhojpur

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

Dewanti Devi W/O Awadhesh Yadav @ Awadhesh Singh R/O VillageChhotaki Hardiya, P.S- Jagdishpur, Distt.- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Rita Verma, APP.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

ORAL ORDER

2 20-02-2024

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

The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in a case in connection with Bihiyan P.S. Case No. 91 of 2022 dated 16.03.2022 for the offence punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

As per the prosecution case, total 121 litres of illicit country made liquor was recovered from the motorcycle.

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 the owner of the said motorcycle. The said motorcycle was being

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7657 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 2/3

driven by the husband of the petitioner at the time of the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is a lady. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The name of the petitioner has transpired because petitioner is the owner of the said motorcycle. 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 record, let the above named petitioner, in the event of her arrest/surrender

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7657 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 3/3

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, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Bihiyan P.S. Case No. 91 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

annpurna/-

U T