Anil Kumar Alias Anil Rajput Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5695 of 2024

Anil Kumar @ Anil Rajput, aged about 28 years, S/o Jairakhan Rajput, R/o village Chitrau, P.O. & P.S. – Mirjapur, District – Shahjahanpur, State- Uttar Pradesh ..... Petitioner

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶7

For the Petitioner : Ms. Diksha Rani, Advocate Mr. Riday Mukherjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, APP

¶8

-----

¶9

5/02.09.2024 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned APP appearing for the State.

¶10

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Daltonganj Sadar P.S. Case No.37 of 2024, corresponding to NDPS Case No.15 of 2024, registered under Sections 17 & 18 of the NDPS Act on 25.04.2024, who is in jail since 25.04.2024.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that as per the allegations set out in the FIR is that the narcotic drugs namely opium ( afim ) measuring about 490 grams is said to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

¶12

It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the quantity of opium, which is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of this petitioner is under the category of intermediary.

¶13

It is further submitted that the charge-sheet in this case has been submitted but the FSL has not been received and therefore, till the submission of the charge-sheet, it could not be ascertained as to whether the recovered contraband was opium or not and the petitioner is rotting in jail since 25.04.2024. It has further been pointed out in paragraph-14 of this bail application that there is no criminal antecedent against this petitioner and therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶14

On the other hand, the learned APP furnished the counter affidavit on behalf of the State before this Court during the course of the argument. Let it be kept on record.

¶15

It is submitted on behalf of the State that the petitioner has been caught red-handed along with intermediary quantity of opium measuring 490 grams and therefore, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail, although he did not

¶16

controvert this fact that there is no criminal history against this petitioner and he is in jail since 25.04.2024.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record of this case.

¶18

Having taken into consideration the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, it is found just and fair to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, petitioner above named is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Special Judge under NDPS Act, Palamau, in connection with Daltonganj Sadar P.S. Case No.37 of 2024, corresponding to NDPS Case No.15 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner will cooperate in the trail and will appear before the learned court below on each and every date as and when required by them, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned court below for the cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

¶20

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶21

R.Kumar

¶22

-2-

Anil Kumar Alias Anil Rajput v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Alias Anil Rajput v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arbaj Ansari Alias Arbaj Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ritik Kumar Sah Alias Ritik Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhananjay Ram Vs the State of Jharkhansd

Harshit Guria Alias Boyda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Krishna Gope Vs the State of Jharkhand

Binod Kumar Alias Kanhaiya Vs the State of Jharkhand