Dismissed¶21

Ram Prakash Pradhan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC7 Mar 2024CR. MISC./2187/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Cr. Misc. No. 2187 of 2024; pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail rejected; NDPS Act sections 21(C), 22(C); PS Case No. 431 of 2023, Jaynagar PS, Madhubani; recovery of cough syrup, Nitovet tablets, Inpentozocin and Buprenorphine ampules from petitioner's house; gravity of offence; Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh; decided 07-03-2024.

What did the court decide?

Considering the recovery of the alleged articles from the petitioner's house and the gravity of the offence, the court rejected the petitioner's prayer for pre-arrest bail. ¶21

Ram Prakash Pradhan Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2187 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-431 Year-2023 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Ram Prakash Pradhan son of Shankar Kumar Mahran resident of marwari mohalla, ward no. 08, jainagar, p.s. jainagar, distrct - madhubani

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 07-03-2024

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶14

State.

¶15

Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 21(C) , 22(C), of the NDPS Act .

¶16

As per the prosecution case, illegal and prohibited incriminating articles of 900 bottles of New Codiwell cough Syrup , 13,200 Tablets of Nitovet, 400 Amples of Inpentozocin , 50 Amules of Inj . Buprenopphine containing N . D. P . S. were recovered from the house of this petitioner.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he is no way

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2187 of 2024(3) dt.07-03-2024 2/2

¶19

connected with the alleged occurrence . Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the alleged incriminating articles have been recovered from the house of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the fact that recovery of the alleged articles have been made from the house of the petitioner and gravity of offence, prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is rejected.

¶22

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶23

Koushik/-

¶24

U T

Ram Prakash Pradhan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prakash Pradhan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamdeo Paswan @ Latoria Paswan Vs the State of Bihar

Om Prakash Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Kumar @ Alok Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Ankit Kumar @ Raushan Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Chhotu Kumar @ Ankush Kumar Vs the State of Bihar