In an NDPS bail petition, the High Court rejected the petitioner's claim that he leased the land where opium poppy plants were found to a co-accused. The Court held the defence unreliable and the offence serious, thus refusing bail.
Prayer for bail stands rejected as petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
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.45880 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2022 Thana- CHHABILAPUR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Vijay Prasad @ Vijay Mahto S/o Late Chhotan Mahto R/o villageChandaura, P.S.- Chhabilapur, District- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Rita Verma, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER
2 08-12-2022
The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Chhabilapur P.S. Case No. 25 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20 and 25 of the NDPS Act.
As per the prosecution, the informant along with other police personnel acting upon a secret information raided the alleged place and found 400 small Opium poppy plants over the land of this petitioner and 500 small Opium poppy plants
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45880 of 2022(2) dt.08-12-2022 2/3
over the land of other co-accused namely, Pintu Kumar.
The main submissions advanced by learned counsel
Mr. Dilip Kumar, appearing for the petitioner are that the petitioner is a government school teacher and he is the owner of the land in question where the Opium plants were found but in actual he had given the said land to co-accused namely Deeplata Kumari on lease and said co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail and petitioner had no concern to the alleged cultivation of the Opium plants and he has clean antecedent and has been languishing in jail since 12.05.2022.
Learned APP Mrs.Rita Verma, appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.
Heard both the sides and perused the FIR and the seizure list. Petitioner is admittedly the owner of the land where 400 Opium poppy small plants were found and petitioner’s defence as mentioned in the petition that he had given his land on lease to one namely Deeplata Kumari does not seem reliable and the allegation of cultivating Opium plants on a private land of which the petitioner is owner without taking legal permission is a very serious offence under NDPS Act. Considering the seriousness of the allegation appearing against the petitioner, in the opinion of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45880 of 2022(2) dt.08-12-2022 3/3
this Court the petitioner does not deserve to the privilege of
bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
(Shailendra Singh, J.)
maynaz/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner who is the owner of land where prohibited plants were found deserves bail in an NDPS offence.
Whether the defence that the land was leased to another person who is a co-accused explains the possession of plants.
Whether reliability of the petitioner's defence given the seriousness of the offence warrants grant of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay Prasad @ Vijay Mahto
The State of Bihar
Shailendra Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
