Manoj Singh @ Manoj Kumar Singh vs State Of Bihar

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

Heard Mr. Rajive Ranjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter

referred to as the ‘APP’) for the State.

The matter has been heard out of turn on the basis of motion slip being filed by learned counsel for the petitioner yesterday, which was allowed.

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Lakhisarai Government Official Case No. 158C2 of 2020 dated 04.11.2020, instituted under

Sections 30(a), 32, 41 and 56(a)(b) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

The allegation against the petitioner is that from the motorcycle owned by her 60 litres of mahua wine was seized.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that she is a lady and though the motorcycle was registered in her name but was used by her husband

who was caught driving the motorcycle with the wine. It was submitted that she is not aware of any dealing of the husband, being a simple housewife,

and, thus, has no role or connection with whatever article that may have been recovered or even the activities of her husband. It was further

submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP submitted that when it is not disputed that the motorcycle from which recovery of mahua wine has been effected belonged to the

petitioner, under the Act, there is prima facie offence made out. Thus, it was submitted that the present application would not be maintainable in view

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

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. The recovery admittedly being made from the motorcycle which was registered in the name of the petitioner, offence

under the Act is made out.

For reasons aforesaid, the application stands disposed off as not maintainable.