Disposed

Nikesh Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Sept 2024B.A./6224/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in an NDPS case involving 11 sachets of brown sugar sought regular bail, citing undisclosed weight in seizure list, filed charge-sheet, long custody and one earlier case on bail. State opposed citing red-handed recovery and prior criminal antecedent. Bail granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties, subject to appearing on each court date; failure may lead to bail cancellation.

Nikesh Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6224 of 2024

¶2

Nikesh Kumar Sharma ... … Petitioner

¶3

Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶4

¶5

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶6

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P. --------

¶7

Order No. 04 / Dated 4^th September, 2024

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

¶9

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No. 61 of 2024, dated 26.04.2024, for the offence registered under Sections 20/22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act and the case is pending before the Court of learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur.

¶10

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that as per the prosecution case it is alleged that this petitioner was apprehended with 11 sachets of brown sugar like material each containing 0.16 grams in which the brown sugar was weighed 0.025 grams as evident from the impugned order.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the seizure list the weight of the alleged contraband has not been disclosed and nothing has been mentioned in the seizure list about the measurement of the contraband which is said to have been recovered from the possession of this petitioner although the weight has been disclosed in the body of the F.I.R. where it is stated that 4.3 grams of brown sugar has been recovered from the total seized 27 sachets from two accused persons including 11 sachets from this petitioner and rest of the sachets were found in the possession of the co-accused Gurmeet Singh.

¶12

It has further been submitted that charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and possibility of tampering the evidence is very remove and the petitioner is in custody since 27.04.2024.

¶13

Further, it has also been pointed out that there was one case against this petitioner vide Bagbera P.S. Case No. 122 of 2021 in which he is on bail and

¶14

therefore, he may be enlarged on bail as he is ready to cooperate in the trial of the case.

¶15

On the other hand the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that this petitioner has been caught red handed alongwith 11 sachets of brown sugar each sachet weighing 0.16 grams as evident from the F.I.R. itself and on earlier occasion this petitioner was having one criminal case vide Bagbera P.S. Case No. 122 of 2021and therefore, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Having heard the parties, perused the records of this case.

¶17

In the light of the persuasive submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and under the facts and circumstances of this case, the petitioner hereinabove is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur, in connection with Bagbera P.S. Case No. 61 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner will appear before the learned Court below on each and every date as and when required, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned Court below for the cancellation of the bail as per the provisions of law.

¶18

D.S.

¶19

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶20

2 B.A. No.6224 of 2024

Nikesh Kumar Sharma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikesh Kumar Sharma 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

Ravi Shankar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laddu Singh Alias Saba Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Banti Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rinal Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tinku Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suchit Das Alias Bachu Das Vs the State of Jharkhand