Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Rai vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 3629 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37719 of 2020
   Arising out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                     District- Vaishali
======================================================

Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Rai (Male) aged about 20 years, S/o Jhagru Rai R/o Village- Husenipur, P.S.- Tisieuta, District- Vaishali

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

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinav Ashok, Advocate For the State : Mr. Chandrasen Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 22-07-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Abhinav Ashok, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Chandrasen Prasad Singh, learned Additional

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

State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

C2A Case No. 12 of 2020 dated 15.01.2020, 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 when

police on secret information went to his field, from a pit 86.40

litres of liquor was recovered.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37719 of 2020 dt.22-07-2021

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

neither the petitioner was apprehended at the spot nor was he

involved in such business. It was submitted that the field was an

open field and the petitioner has no role or knowledge with regard

to what was kept in his field and, thus, the said recovery cannot be

said to be connected to the petitioner. It was submitted that the

petitioner has no criminal antecedent and the name of the

petitioner has been taken in the FIR due to enmity with the

villagers.

6. Learned APP submitted that once there is recovery of

liquor from the field owned by the petitioner, an offence is made

out under the Act and, thus, the present petition under Section 438

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 would not be

maintainable in view of bar of Section 76(2) of the Act. It was

further submitted that the petitioner would have full opportunity to

raise all issues and points available to him to rebut the allegation

but the same has to be done at the stage of trial by adducing

evidence before the Court below.

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. Once, from the

field which is owned by the petitioner, there is recovery of huge Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37719 of 2020 dt.22-07-2021

amount of liquor, prima facie, an offence is made out under the

Act and, thus, the present petition would not be maintainable due

to bar of Section 76(2) of the Act.

8. In the aforesaid background, the present petition

stands dismissed as not maintainable.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Vikash/-

AFR/NAFR U T