Allowed

Ranjan Rai and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC11 May 2016CR. MISC./16466/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A special leave petition sought bail for two petitioners languishing in custody under the NDPS Act. The High Court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties, citing procedural flaws in FIR and seizure lists.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties to the Special Judge (NDPS Act). Bail bonds to be cancelled on further involvement or three consecutive defaults.

Ranjan Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.16466 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -58 Year- 2015 Thana -KANGALI DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ====================================================== 1. Ranjan Rai Son of Brahma Rai R/o Village Dhanauti Math, P.S. Dhanauti O.P., District Siwan 2. Dwarika Yadav Son of Late Satnarain Yadav R/o Village Shyampur Kotharahan, P.S. Nautan, District West Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivjee Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Indu Bala Pandey (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶3

2 11-05-2016 Petitioners are languishing in custody since 16.11.2015 in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20/22/23 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The petitioners were intercepted while entering into the Indian boarder on Nepal boarder and 6 Kg and 5.5 Kg ganja were recovered from the petitioners.

¶4

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that First Information Report suggests that the ganja were not weighed and the weight was mentioned on the statement of the accused. The F.I.R also does not reflect that what is the exact quantity of recovery from each petitioner. The seizure list does not bear the signature of the accused persons and the investigation has already concluded. It is further submitted that petitioners have no criminal antecedent and a

¶5

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16466 of 2016 (2) dt.11-05-2016

¶6

2/2

¶7

statement to that effect has been made in para 3 of the petition.

¶8

Considering the recovery of the contraband between small and commercial quantity and the investigation being concluded, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge(NDPS Act), Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Kangli P.S. Case No. 58 of 2015.

¶9

Let learned Court below cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners, if the petitioners get substantially involved in similar nature of offence or defaults for three consecutive occasions during trial.

¶10

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶11

Shageer/-

¶12

U T

Ranjan Rai and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjan Rai and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar

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

Md. Firoz Alam Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Rekha Devi @ Anita Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Rashid @ Rasid Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Shambhu @ Shital Jee @ Sudhir Jee @ Lambu Jee @ Netajee @ Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Jee Vs The State Of Bihar

Bed Prakash Singh @ Ved Prakash Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Manoj Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar