Anuj Ray Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

Anuj Ray Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail: enlargement on arrest/surrender within six weeks on a bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 248 of 2023, subject to conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 248 of 2023 for offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, should be enlarged on anticipatory bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation against the petitioner, anticipatory bail granted: on arrest/surrender within six weeks, the petitioner is to be enlarged on bail on a bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 248 of 2023, subject to conditions under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED - Anuj Ray, apprehending arrest in Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 248 of 2023 dated 10.11.2023 (Thana Gangabridge, District Vaishali) for offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, where the prosecution case is recovery of 203.580 litres of illicit Indian made foreign liquor from the bathan of a co-accused. Counsel pleaded innocence, no criminal antecedent, name disclosed by apprehended persons, nothing recovered from the petitioner's conscious possession, and relied on the Full Bench ruling of the Patna High Court in Ram Vinay Yadav v. State of Bihar, 2019 (2) PLJR 1089, that an anticipatory bail application in an Excise Act case is maintainable despite the Section 76(2) bar where the FIR makes out no offence under that provision; the A.P.P. objected invoking the Section 76(2) bar. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation, the Court (Chandra Prakash Singh, J; order dated 21-02-2024) directed that on arrest/surrender within six weeks the petitioner be enlarged on anticipatory bail on a 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, Vaishali at Hajipur, subject to conditions under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; the application stands allowed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8421 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2023 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali

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

Anuj Ray S/o Bharat Ray R/o Vill - Litiyahi, P.S. - Raghopur, (Rustampur O.P.), Dist. - Vaishali

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravish Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

ORAL ORDER

2 21-02-2024

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

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 248 of 2023 dated 10.11.2023 for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 203.580 litres of illicit Indian made foreign liquor was recovered from the bathan of the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The name of the petitioner was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8421 of 2024(2) dt.21-02-2024 2/3

disclosed by the apprehended persons. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery rather the recovery has been made from the bathan of the coaccused person. 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.

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.

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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8421 of 2024(2) dt.21-02-2024 3/3

20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 248 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

Gautam/-

U T