Ganesh Prasad Gupta vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1950 Patna

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18381 of 2021
         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2020 Thana- SAHAR District- Bhojpur
  ======================================================

Ganesh Prasad Gupta, aged about 47 years, Male, son of Satya Narayan Gupta, R/O Village and P.S.- Sahar, District- Bhojpur (Ara)

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

  For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Yogesh Chadnra Verma, Senior Advocate with
                                    Mr. Maya Shankar Mishra, Advocate
  For the State            :        Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-04-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned senior

counsel along with Mr. Maya Shankar Mishra, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Mr. Amitesh Kumar, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the

State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Sahar PS Case No. 298 of 2020 dated 24.12.2020, instituted

under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act,

2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that on

secret information, when the police reached his house, he

managed to flee away with his two sons and one son was caught Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18381 of 2021 dt.15-04-2021

and further, that from the vehicle standing inside the campus,

there was recovery of liquor and from the godown in his house

also, there was recovery of liquor.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the recovery is not from his conscious possession and he was

not present in the house when the raid was conducted and

recovery shown. It was further submitted that the vehicle from

which recovery is shown is not owned by him.

6. Learned APP submitted that as per the allegation in

the FIR, the recovery is from the vehicle, which was found

inside the campus of the petitioner and also from the godown

inside the house of the petitioner. Thus, it was submitted that

offence is made out under the Act and the present petition under

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, would not

be maintainable due to bar of Section 76(2) of the Act.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the

Court finds substance in the contention of the learned APP.

Once, as per the allegation, recovery is from the vehicle parked

inside the premises of the petitioner as also recovery shown

from the godown inside the house of the petitioner, prima facie

offence being made out under the Act, the present application Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18381 of 2021 dt.15-04-2021

for grant of pre-arrest bail would not be maintainable as the bar

of Section 76(2) of the Act would come into play.

8. Accordingly, for reasons aforesaid, the application

stands disposed off as not maintainable.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

J. Alam/-

AFR/NAFR U T