The court rejected the petitioner's bail application in a case involving manufacture and possession of foreign liquor and charas. Bail was denied due to the commercial quantity of contraband recovered from the petitioner's house.
Bail application dismissed; trial concluded within one year.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11906 of 2016
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -80 Year- 2012 Thana -DARPA DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== 1. Santosh Kumar, S/o Late Kishori Lal Prasad, R/o Vill.- Narkatiya, P.S.Darpa, Distt.- East Champaran (Motihari). .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 18-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
Petitioner is languishing in custody since 06.02.2015 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 47A of the Excise Act and 20, 22, 23, 24 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The prosecution case is that from the house of petitioner 4 K.g chars in eight packets, two pieces of sachets packing machine, 10 liters of country made liquor, one machine used for sealing the foreign liquor, 200 pieces of wrapper of foreign liquor, 500 pieces of caps of foreign liquor and 250 empty bottles of foreign liquor were recovered.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11906 of 2016 (3) dt.18-04-2016
2
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner mortgage his house in question on the eve of marriage of his daughter hence, recovery cannot be treated from the possession of the petitioner. The independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution case.
It is submitted by the learned A.P.P. that commercial quantity of charas have been recovered from the house of the petitioner and this fact is not in dispute that recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner.
Considering the commercial quantity of recovery of the contraband, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, bail application stands dismissed.
Let the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judgecum- Special Judge, Motihari conclude the trial within a period of one year.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)
P.K./-
U T
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Santosh Kumar
The State of Bihar
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
