Allowed

Rambharosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC26 Aug 2022CR. MISC./26842/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Patna granted bail to Rambharosh Kumar in a narcotics case. The petitioner was in judicial custody due to a co-accused's confessional statement, as nothing was recovered from him. The Court inclined to grant bail, imposing standard conditions including a family surety, appearance in court, and no tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of like amount each, subject to standard conditions including appearance in court and no tampering with evidence.

Rambharosh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26842 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2021 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Rambharosh Kumar, S/o Tapeshwar Rai R/o village- Jamalpur Kodai, P.S.Gaighat, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dashrath Mehta, APP ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 26-08-2022

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State through virtual mode in view of COVID-19.

¶11

Let the defect(s) be removed within four weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course.

¶12

The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.45 of 2021 arising out of Gaighat P.S. Case No.176 of 2021 instituted under Sections 414/34 of the IPC and Section 8/20/22 of the NDPS Act.

¶13

As per the allegation in the FIR, the police has alleged that while on patrolling duty, it intercepted those riding a motorcycle. While two persons successfully escaped, one Sunil Rai was apprehended and from his motorcycle, it is alleged that 3.3 Kg. ‘ Ganja ’ was recovered/seized. He gave the name of the persons who escaped as Sheo Shankar Rai and Rambharosh

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26842 of 2022(2) dt.26-08-2022 2/3

¶15

Kumar (the petitioner herein).

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his name come in the confessional statement of the said Sunil Rai from whose motorcycle the ‘ Ganja ’ was allegedly recovered/seized. It is his further submission that there has not been any recovery/seizure from his conscious possession and only because of the confessional statement of the said Sunil Kumar is in custody since 19.11.2021 (as stated in para-16 of the bail application) of the bail application.

¶17

Taking into account the aforesaid fact that the petitioner has not been arrested from the spot, his name has come in the confessional statement by the another accused Sunil Kumar, is in custody since 19.11.2021 and charge-sheet stands submitted, this Court is inclined to grant him privilege of bail.

¶18

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.45 of 2021 arising out of Gaighat P.S. Case No.176 of 2021 to the satisfaction of learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur, subject to following conditions:

¶19

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner, who shall provide official document to show

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26842 of 2022(2) dt.26-08-2022 3/3

¶21

his/her bona fide;

¶22

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reasons will entail cancellation of his/her bail by the Trial court itself;

¶23

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶24

With the aforesaid observations, the bail application is

¶25

allowed.

¶26

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶27

Prakash Narayan /- U T

Rambharosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambharosh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Thakur @ Rahul Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Swarnkar Vs the State of Bihar

Ram Naresh Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Nain Devi @ Naina Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar@ Abhishek Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shiv Paswan Vs the State of Bihar