Allowed

Mudit Rai v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC25 Aug 2023B.A./3694/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed the bail application of Mudit Rai, accused under the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. Relying on the confession of co-accused not being read as evidence and lack of contraband in his possession, the court granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing bonds of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding cooperation, non-tampering, and surety relationship.

Mudit Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3694 of 2023

¶2

Mudit Rai ..... … Petitioner

¶3

Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶4

-------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶5

-----For the Petitioners : Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl.P.P. --------

¶6

02/25^th August, 2023

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

¶8

2. This bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant with prayer to release on bail in connection with Ranchi Rail P.S. Case No.09 of 2022 registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 pending in the court of learned Judicial Commissioner cum Special Judge, Ranchi.

¶9

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per the F.I.R. allegations, two persons were apprehended at Ranchi Railway Station, who were identified as Sanny Madhesia Kandu and Umesh Kumar Rawat and from the possession of Sanny Madhesia Kandu 24.280 k.g. ganja contained in two bags was recovered while from the possession of Umesh Kumar Rawat 24.40 k.g. ganja contained in two bags was recovered and it was disclosed by both apprehended persons that they had purchased the same from Dusmanta Nayak of Kalahandi, Odissa and were going to supply the same to Mudit Rai of Deoria, Uttar Pradesh. It is further submitted that neither the applicant apprehended at the spot nor any contraband was recovered from his possession. The two persons, who were apprehended at the spot and from whose possession ganja was recovered, have already been granted bail by this Court in B.A. No.9768 of 2022 vide order dated 18.10.2022 and the confession made by the apprehended co-accused against the present applicant cannot be read in a evidence. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 24.02.2023.

¶10

4. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that certainly the name of the present applicant was

¶11

-2-

¶12

disclosed by two apprehended persons, accordingly, his name figured in the FIR. There is also the evidence that in regard to call details report and account transactions are also corroborated the confessional statement of the apprehended co-accused and the applicant is also having criminal antecedent of one case.

¶13

5. In view of the submissions made and materials on record, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in aforesaid case, subject to the following conditions :-

¶14

i. The applicant will co-operate in the investigation, inquiry and trial and will not absent themselves on the date fixed by the learned trial court without any reasonable cause;

¶15

ii. The applicant will not threaten the witness or tamper any evidence;

¶16

iii.One of the surety must be the close relative of the applicant; and

¶17

iv.In breach of any of the conditions, the learned trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant without any further reference to this Court.

¶18

Madhav

Mudit Rai v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mudit Rai v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangal Purty Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Alias Sanju Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradip Yadav Alias Pradip Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deepak Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Samat Ganjhu Alias Santan Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bigalal Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand