Most. Susheela Devi vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4419 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10301 of 2021
        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2020 Thana- PALASI District- Araria
======================================================

Most. Susheela Devi, aged about 50 years, Female, Wife of Late Shiv Narayan Yadav @ Late Shivanand Yadav, Resident of Village-Hasanpur, P.S.- Palasi, District- Araria.

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

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate For the State : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-09-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The case has been taken up out of turn on the basis

of motion slip filed by learned counsel for the petitioner, which

was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Mr. Zainul Abedin, learned Additional

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

State.

4. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Palasi PS Case No. 288 of 2020 dated 06.09.2020, instituted

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

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

5. The allegation against the petitioner is that on secret Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10301 of 2021 dt.02-09-2021

information that the petitioner was keeping illicit liquor in her

house for selling, when the police went to her house and

searched, from the wooden hut outside her dwelling house

stacked under hay, 10 bottles of Nepali Litchi wine, totalling 3

litres, was seized.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

she is a lady and has no connection with the recovered wine as

neither she was aware of the same nor knows about who had

kept it. It was further submitted that she has no other criminal

antecedent.

7. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner being a

lady of the house was in command since she is a widow and,

thus, she has to take responsibility of whatever happens on her

property. It was submitted that in law, once recovery has been

effected from the premises belonging to the petitioner, the bar of

Section 76(2) of the Act would come into play and, thus, the

present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 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. In view

of the fact that the recovery has been made from the premises Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10301 of 2021 dt.02-09-2021

which is owned by the petitioner, prima facie, an offence being

made out under the Act, the bar of Section 76(2) of the Act

would apply.

9. For reasons aforesaid, the petition stands dismissed

as not maintainable.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Anjani/-

AFR/NAFR U T