Allowed¶36

Jitendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Feb 2024CR. MISC./9414/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Criminal Miscellaneous No.8439 of 2024 with Criminal Miscellaneous No. 9414 of 2024; order dt. 20-02-2024; Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.; regular bail; NDPS Act, 1985, Sections 20(b)(ii)(b)(25) & 29; ganja recovery 2.119 Kg, 1.564 Kg, 2.069 Kg; Parbatta P.S. Case No. 518 of 2023; Special Case (NDPS) No. 34 of 2023; District Khagaria; petitioners Nandani Devi and Jitendra Kumar; judicial custody since 12.11.2023; no criminal antecedents; charge-sheet filed; bail bonds Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties; bail allowed.

What did the court decide?

Release of both petitioners on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court. ¶36

Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8439 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-518 Year-2023 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria

¶3

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

¶4

Nandani Devi Wife Of Ratan Paswan Resident of Village-Lagar, P.S.-Parbatta, District-Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

with

¶11

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 9414 of 2024

¶12

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-518 Year-2023 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria

¶13

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

¶14

Jitendra Kumar Son of Mebalal Rai Resident of Village-Jethuli, P.S.-Nadi Fatuha, District-Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶19

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

¶20

Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 8439 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Singh, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 9414 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ======================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

2 20-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶24

APP for the State in both the cases.

¶25

Perused the case diary.

¶26

The petitioners seek bail in connection with

¶27

Parbatta P.S. Case No. 518 of 2023 arising out of Special Case (NDPS) No. 34 of 2023 instituted for the offences punishable

¶28

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8439 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 2/3

¶29

under Sections 20(b)(ii)(b)(25) & 29 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

¶30

As per prosecution case, the Informant, on receipt

¶31

of secret information, intercepted a tempo. There were three persons sitting in the middle seat of the tempo. On suspicion, the police searched a woman and man. They disclosed their name as Nandini Devi and Jitendra Kumar (the petitioners in both the cases). On search, two packets of Ganja (2.119 Kg) wrapped with brown colour tape were found from the waist of the frock suit along with two mobiles were recovered from the possession of Nandini Devi whereas one packet of Ganja (1.564 Kg) and an android mobile were recovered from the possession of the accused Jitendra Kumar. They also stated the name of another co-accused Juli Devi and on her disclosures, the police reached at the house of Julie Devi. On seeing the police, she tried to flee from there but, was arrested. On search, the police recovered one android mobile and 2.069 Kg. of Ganja from her house.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioners have committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. Learned counsel further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of

¶33

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8439 of 2024(2) dt.20-02-2024 3/3

¶34

the petitioners. Petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovered contraband. Learned counsel further submits that quantity of recovered contraband comes under intermediary quantity. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent and are languishing in judicial custody since 12.11.2023. Charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶35

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of bail of the petitioners.

¶36

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody of the petitioners as also the petitioners having no criminal antecedents, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 518 of 2023 arising out of Special Case (NDPS) No. 34 of 2023.

¶37

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶38

amitkr/-

¶39

U T

Jitendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhiraj @ Abhiraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Ritik Raushan Vs the State of Bihar

Mukesh Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Ganesh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Paswan Vs The State of Bihar