Single judge order rejecting regular bail application in an N.D.P.S. case involving possession of Charas. Court denied bail citing nature of allegation, criminal antecedents, and pending cases.
Bail petition rejected.
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.34726 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2020 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Vikash Kumar @ Mahanta Son Of Birendra Kishore Singh @ Tantan Singh R/O Village- Balra Kishun, P.S.- Maniyari, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niranjan Parihar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Asha Devi, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER
3 23-11-2022
Heard Mr. Niranjan Parihar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Asha Devi, learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Maniyari P.S. Case No. 102 of 2020, N.D.P.S. Case No. 35 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8, 20 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge-IV, Muzaffarpur.
The prosecution case in brief is that the petitioner along with his brother were possessed with 850 gms of Charas like material. They were apprehended by the police, but the petitioner managed to flee away from the place of occurrence, however his brother disclosed his name that he along with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34726 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 2/3
petitioner due to hardship faced during the lockdown period were engaged in trade of selling Charas.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that from the very perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that the petitioner was not apprehended on the spot, rather the seizure was made in his absence and the seizure list also contains the signature of his brother, who due to enmity has taken the name of the petitioner that he was also one of his associate. It is further submitted by learned counsel that petitioner is in custody since 12.06.2020 and the quantity which was recovered even taking into consideration is less than commercial quantity.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for grant of bail. In this regard she has drawn the attention of the paragraph 2 and 3 of the bail application and paragraph no. 51 of the case diary in which altogether eleven cases were pending and two further cases were lodged against the petitioner as it appears in paragraph-51 of the case diary.
Taking into consideration, the nature of allegation made against the petitioner and criminal antecedent of the petitioner it would not be proper in the interest of society to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34726 of 2022(3) dt.23-11-2022 3/3
release the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the bail petition stands rejected.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
aditya/- U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in an N.D.P.S. case involving trafficking allegations.
Whether the quantity of seized narcotics being less than commercial quantity warrants bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vikash Kumar @ Mahanta
The State of Bihar
Purnendu Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
