Allowed

Dhiraj Kumar Patel @ Dhiraj Patel v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Sept 2023CR. MISC./6151/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner in custody for NDPS offences sought bail alleging false implication and non-compliance of Section 42 and 50 N.D.P.S. Act. Court allowed bail considering FS.L. report discrepancies, directing verification of antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to specific conditions.

Dhiraj Kumar Patel @ Dhiraj Patel Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6151 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2021 Thana- EAST CHAMPARAN GRP CASE DistrictEast Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Dhiraj Kumar Patel @ Dhiraj Patel Son of Rajendra Patel Resident of VillageBirganj, Ward No.-5, P.S.- Chauki Nagwa of Parsa, District- Nepal

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶8

6 04-09-2023

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶10

Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 06.04.2021 in connection with NDPS Case No. 32 of 2021 (CIS No. 32 of 2021) arising out of Raxaul P.S. Case No. 08 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 04.04.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 21(c), 22(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶11

Recovery is of Phenergan injection - 200 ml, Noorphen injection – 400 ml and Diazepam injection – 400 ml.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R. as well as seizure list that Phenergan injection -

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6151 of 2023(6) dt.04-09-2023 2/4

¶14

200 ml, Noorphen injection – 400 ml and Diazepam injection – 400 ml have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that there is non-compliance of the mandatory provision of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. and the recovered injections does not come under the purview of the NDPS Act and without the F.S.L. report the police has filed the charge sheet against the petitioner. He further submits that the date of the F.S.L. report was 31.07.2023 and the charge has already been framed in the year 2021 itself. The results of the F.S.L. report are quoted as :

¶15

NOOPHIN is a pain killer used to treat moderate to severe pain.

¶16

DIAZEPAM is a sedative and psychotropic drugs and induces sleep when injected.

¶17

Promethazine is an antihistamine sometimes used as a sleeping pill,

¶18

The above results of the F.S.L. report does not supports the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. and the petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2021.

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6151 of 2023(6) dt.04-09-2023 3/4

¶22

and the period of custody and the fact that the F.S.L. report does not supports the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 12^th Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge NDPS Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with NDPS Case No. 32 of 2021 (CIS No. 32 of 2021) arising out of Raxaul P.S. Case No. 08 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:-

¶23

i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶24

ii. 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.

¶25

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6151 of 2023(6) dt.04-09-2023 4/4

¶27

acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶28

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶29

Vanisha/-

¶30

U T

Dhiraj Kumar Patel @ Dhiraj Patel v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhiraj Kumar Patel @ Dhiraj Patel 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

Shahid Miyan @ Shahij Miyan Vs the State of Bihar

Uma Shankar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikky Kumar @ Aarabh Srivastava Vs The State of Bihar

Abinash Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Md. Tahseen Vs the State of Bihar