Allowed

Rohit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC30 Nov 2023CR. MISC./76096/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an oral order arising from a criminal miscellaneous application, the Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner accused under Section 22 of the NDPS Act following his argument of false implication and lack of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail by furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76096 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2023 Thana- DARBHANGA District- Darbhanga

¶3

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

¶4

ROHIT KUMAR SON OF LATE RAGHIVEER RAY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NAGA MANDIR MISHRA TOLA WARD NO. 18, PS- TOWN, DIST- DARBHANGA

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 30-11-2023

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶12

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶13

As per prosecution case, on secret information received that the petitioner sold narcotic medicine on his house then police party reached at that place and on search there has been recovery of 192 tablets of Pyeevon Spas Plus.

¶14

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. He submitted that from the perusal of the FIR, Pyveen Spas Plus recovered 192 tablets from the possession of the petitioner, the said tablets used as pain killer

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76096 of 2023(2) dt.30-11-2023 2/2

¶16

not under narcotics. He further submitted that the petitioner kept the tablet for use of pain killer in his family members not for the purpose of business as narcotic view. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He further submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail petition. He is languishing in judicial custody since 02.08.2023.

¶17

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (NDPS), Darbhanga in connection with Darbhanga P.S. Case No. 230 of 2023.

¶19

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)

¶20

Arish/-

¶21

U T

Rohit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit 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

Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Abhimanyu Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Dhiraj Kumar @ Dhirja Kumar Mehta @ Feku Mehta Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Izarail @ Ajjo @ Md. Ajjo Vs The State of Bihar