Patna High Court
Ram Dayal Mahto vs The State Of Bihar on 17 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7716 of 2021
Arising out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2019 Thana- KHODAWANDPUR District- Begusarai
======================================================
Ram Dayal Mahto, aged about 49 years, son of late Ram Udgar Mahto, Son
of Late Ram Udgar Mahto Resident of Village - Fafaut, Ward No. 1, P.S.-
Khodawandpur, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Arif, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 17-08-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Md. Arif, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
(hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.
3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Khodawandpur PS Case No. 263 of 2019 dated 06.12.2019,
instituted under Sections 120(B), 414, 272 and 273/34 and 30(a) of
the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to
as the 'Act').
4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was
involved in the business of liquor and was connected to the seizure
of 362.88 litres of liquor.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7716 of 2021 dt.17-08-2021
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is
not named in the FIR and only during investigation, he has been
implicated as one of the persons who had run away and from the
two motorcycles of the sons of the petitioner, there has been
recovery. It was submitted that the recovery has not been made
from the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that
one of the sons namely, Ajit Kumar, who is named in the FIR has
been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench by order
dated 07.07.2020 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 17378 of 2020.
6. Having regard to the aforesaid, the Court on
20.07.2021 had asked the learned APP to obtain the up-do-date
legible photo copy of the entire case diary as also specific report
with regard to the ownership of the orchard from which the
recovery of liquor has been shown, from the Superintendent of
Police, Begusarai.
7. Learned APP, from the case diary and the report,
submitted that the letter of the Superintendent of Police, Begusarai
dated 14.08.2021, discloses that the orchard from which the liquor
has been recovered is owned by the petitioner and his three sons.
Thus, it was submitted that from the attending circumstances an
offence is made out under the Act and the present petition under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7716 of 2021 dt.17-08-2021
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Code') would not be maintainable.
8. 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 learned APP. Once, the
recovery has been made from the orchard attached to the house of
the petitioner, prima facie, an offence is made out under the Act
and, thus, the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act would apply.
9. In the aforesaid background, the petition stands
dismissed as not maintainable.
10. Interim protection granted to the petitioner under
order dated 20.07.2021 stands vacated.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Vikash/-
AFR/NAFR
U
T
