Anil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== ANIL KUMAR Son of Chandra Dev Ray Resident of Village-Mahua Singh Rai, P.S.-Mahua, District-Vaishali.

¶14

... ... Petitioner/s

¶15

Versus

¶16

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶17

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶18

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 2791 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pratima Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 8501 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pratima Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kumar

¶19

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

2 05-02-2024

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶23

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶24

2 . The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case

¶25

in connection with Mahuwa P.S. Case No. 690/2023 dated 23.102023 registered for the offence punishable u/ss 272 and 273 read with 34 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2791 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 2/3

¶27

Act.

¶28

3. As per the prosecution case, 267.12 litres of illicit liquor was recovered from the house of the co-accused Moti Rai and 8.64 litres of illicit was recovered from the motorcycle.

¶29

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner (Anil Kumar) is the owner of the motorcycle but the said motorcycle was not being driven by the petitioner at the time of alleged occurrence. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners hence, no case is made out against the petitioners. 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.

¶30

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners by

¶31

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2791 of 2024(2) dt.05-02-2024 3/3

¶32

submitting that the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act applies in this case.

¶33

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioners, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court concerned, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahuwa P.S. Case No. 690/2023 subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶34

7. This application stands allowed.

¶35

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶36

atul/-

¶37

U

Anil Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil 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

Md. Akmal Raza @ Akmal Raza Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Gulam Sarwar @ Tutu Mallik @ Ghulam Sarwar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramayan Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Amrendra Kumar Singh @ Kariman Vs The State of Bihar

Pritam Kumar @ Pritam Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Jameer Vs The State of Bihar