Allowed

Neyaz Ahmad @ Monu v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC12 Apr 2021CR. MISC./16398/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition arising from a drug case under the NDPS Act, the High Court granted bail to the petitioner who was a passenger in a vehicle carrying heroin and brown sugar, citing lack of direct material proving his knowledge or ownership of the contraband.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail bond of Rs.20,000/ with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions of cooperating with trial and not leaving the country.

Neyaz Ahmad @ Monu Vs the State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16398 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-424 Year-2020 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Neyaz Ahmad @ Monu Son of Late Jamil Ahmad Resident of MohallaChowkhandi Road, Ward No.30, Police Station- Sasaram Town, Post Sasaram, District- Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 12-04-2021

¶11

Heard the parties in virtual Court proceeding.

¶12

The petitioner is languishing in custody for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C)/21(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶13

From a Triber four wheeler 77 gms of brown sugar and heroin in three small packets was recovered from the backside of the seat of the driver. The petitioner and others were also on the same vehicle. The driver disclosed that the brown sugar and heroin was provided by Mubarak Hussain to carry it to Aurangabad.

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16398 of 2021(3) dt.12-04-2021 2/3

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the recovery was not from conscious possession of the petitioner nor the petitioner is owner of the said vehicle. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The petitioner had gone to attend the marriage ceremony and the Barat party asked the petitioner to sit on the vehicle to reach the destination. The petitioner had to appear in the examination.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for

¶17

bail.

¶18

Considering lack of direct material against the petitioner regarding knowledge of the recovered charas or brown sugar, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is pending in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case No.424 of 2020, with following conditions:

¶19

(a) Both the bailors shall be the resident of territorial jurisdiction of the learned Court-below.

¶20

(b) The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the trial of the case, failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16398 of 2021(3) dt.12-04-2021 3/3

¶22

¶23

permission of the trial Court.

¶24

(Birendra Kumar, J)

¶25

Mkr./-

¶26

U T

Neyaz Ahmad @ Monu v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neyaz Ahmad @ Monu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paramjeet Kumar @ Goura @ Gora Vs the State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Akhil Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Amit Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar

Sunny Rai @ Sunni Rai @ Sunni Gope @ Sunni Kumar Yadav @ Abdhesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Raushan Kumar Paswan @ Gulchan Kumar @ Raushan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar