Allowed

Amit Raj @ Amit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Jul 2022CR. MISC./11776/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to Amit Raj, a accused under the Arms Act, Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, and NDPS Act. The court ordered release on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding cooperation in trial and prevention of evidence tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

Amit Raj @ Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11776 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2021 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

AMIT RAJ @ AMIT KUMAR Son of Shambhu Singh Resident of VillageSagama, Police Station- Kashichak, District- Nawada.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Birendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Meena Singh ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 08-07-2022

¶12

Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be

¶13

removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Giriyak (Pawapuri) P.S. Case No. 474 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a/26 Arms Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2018 and 8/20(B)(ii)(c)/25/29 of the NDPS Act.

¶16

As per prosecution case, from the room of the petitioner total 1.65 litre foreign liquor, 88 gram Ganja was recovered. On search of his body one loaded Desi Katta along with one cartridge was recovered from his waist.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11776 of 2022(2) dt.08-07-2022 2/3

¶19

petitioner is in custody since 02.10.2021. Petitioner bears criminal antecedent of one case. Charge sheet has already been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has no concern with the said place from where the recovery has been made and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. No L.T.I. or signature of petitioner has been taken on the seizure list which falsified the prosecution story. Hence, no offence under Arms Act or Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act or NDPS Act is made out against the petitioner. Neither signature nor copy of seizure list has been served to the petitioner which can connect or prove the involvement of the petitioner in this case. Learned counsel further submits that only 88 gram Ganja has been recovered from the place of occurrence which is not commercial quantity rather the same is less than the small quantity.

¶20

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody and also taking into consideration the material available on record, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioner above named be released on bail

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11776 of 2022(2) dt.08-07-2022 3/3

¶23

on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Iind-cumSpecial Judge Excise, Biharsharif, Nalanda in connection with Giriyak (Pawapuri) P.S. Case No. 474 of 2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶24

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶25

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶26

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶27

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶28

amitkr/-

¶29

Amit Raj @ Amit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Raj @ Amit Kumar 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

Vaibhav Kumar @ Baibhav Arya Vs the State of Bihar

Soni Kumari @ Soni Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Amarjit Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Dhurendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sukhdeo Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar