Patna High Court
Ravi Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 2 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37134 of 2020
Arising out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2020 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
1. Ravi Kumar, aged about 30 years, Gender-Male, S/o Bijly Yadav, Resident
of Village - Naujar Ghat, Near Chitragupt Mandir, P.S. - Khajekalan, District
- Patna.
2. Nitish Ray @ Nitish Kumar, aged about 28 years, Gender-Male, S/o Jaj Ray
@ Jay Ray Resident of Village - Gurhatta, Nutan Ghat, Police Station -
Khajekalan, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 02-07-2021
The matter has been heard via video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.
3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with
Alamganj PS Case No. 183 of 2020 dated 07.03.2020, instituted
under Sections 30(a) and 37(c) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise
Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
4. The allegation against the petitioners is that while
police were on patrolling a secret information was received that
huge quantity of liquor was coming and when they reached near
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37134 of 2020 dt.02-07-2021
Minapur Domkhana, they saw one Tata Magic vehicle and some
persons were present and when raid was conducted, in the vehicle
one person was arrested in a drunken state while other persons
taking the benefit of darkness fled away. It is further alleged that
the driver Bablu Kumar who was also caught as well as the other
person, disclosed the name of the petitioners as the persons who
had fled away and further that the petitioners were the associates.
From the vehicle 27 tubes, each filled with 50 litres of mahua wine
was recovered, the total being 1350 litres.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
they have no connection with the vehicle or the liquor recovered
and only because of the statement of the driver they have been
implicated. It was further submitted that the name of the
petitioners have been introduced at the behest of the police as
already there is another case under the Act against them of the year
2019.
6. Learned APP submitted that the driver and the other
person who was caught with huge quantity of liquor, have
disclosed that it was the petitioners who had run away taking
advantage of darkness and that the petitioners were associates of
the two arrested persons. Thus, learned APP contended that the
present application would not be maintainable due to bar of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37134 of 2020 dt.02-07-2021
Section 76(2) of the Act as prima facie offence is made out under
the Act, that too upon the disclosure made by the persons who
were arrested. It was further contended that despite having
antecedent of being accused in another case under the Act the
petitioners having again indulged in such activity clearly shows
that they have misused the earlier privilege of bail granted to them,
which would also independently disentitle them for any further
indulgence as there has been repetition of offence, which is
violation of one of the basic conditions for release on bail of the
petitioners in the other case.
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 learned APP.
8. For the reasons aforesaid, the petition stands
dismissed, both on merits as well as on the ground of non-
maintainability.
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
Vikash/-
AFR/NAFR
U
T
