Allowed

Guddu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Feb 2022CR. MISC./4889/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court released the petitioner on anticipatory bail in a narcotics case arising during the third COVID-19 wave, noting jail conditions and lack of compliance with certain NDPS Act provisions. Bail is granted on personal bond subject to subsequent furnishing of sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of petitioner on personal bond to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Nalanda, with direction to furnish sureties of Rs. 10,000 each once normalcy is restored.

Guddu Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4889 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2021 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda

¶3

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

¶4

GUDDU KUMAR Son of Ganauri Prasad Resident of Village - Ahiyapur, P.s.- Noorsarai, Distt.- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Mukherjee, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 18-02-2022

¶13

Due to the third wave of COVID-19 Pandemic, the

¶14

matter is being taken up by way of Virtual Court proceeding.

¶15

The matter has been listed under the heading ‘For Orders’ under the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual mode.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks after restoration of normalcy.

¶18

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Noorsarai P.S. case No.42 of 2021 registered under Sections 08(b), 20(a)(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶19

Prosecution case, in short, is that ganja plants weighing 18 kgs are recovered.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4889 of 2022(2) dt.18-02-2022 2/3

¶21

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is alleged that ganja plants weighing 18 kgs are recovered from the open field belonging to the joint family of the petitioner, which is easily accessible to anyone. Same is below the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. There is no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶22

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case/F.I.R.

¶23

It is necessary to indicate here that this Court while considering the prayer made in the present anticipatory bail application has taken note of the exponential rise in number of covid cases due to outbreak of third wave of Covid-19 pandemic. Further this Court can also not lose sight of the fact that the condition of jails is not conducive and suitable to the present situation which has arisen due to the sudden rise in covid cases.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4889 of 2022(2) dt.18-02-2022 3/3

¶26

before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Noorsarai P.S. case No.42/2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶27

Once the normalcy is restored, the petitioner shall furnish bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each within a period of eight weeks to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in connection with the aforesaid case.

¶28

(Sudhir Singh, J)

¶29

Narendra/-

¶30

U T

Guddu Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu 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

Sanjay Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Mustkim Vs The State of Bihar

Lalia Khatoon Vs the State of Bihar

Pintu Rai @ Pintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mantun Kumar @ Mantun Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Mahadev Mahto Vs The State of Bihar