Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69341 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2021 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul

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

Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Paswan Son of Dinesh Paswan Resident of village - Basmatiya, Ward no. 5, Ps- Basmatiya, Dist- Araria

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Narayan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶8

4 10-01-2025

¶9

Heard learned Senior counsel Mr. Rajendra Narayan appearing for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶10

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

¶11

Birpur P.S. Case No. 171 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(c), of Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (in short N.D.P.S. Act).

¶12

As per prosecution case, there is recovery of total 47 kg of contraband Ganja from the car. During the investigation, it has been disclosed that petitioner had directed the driver of the said vehicle to transport the contraband Ganja to Nepal.

¶13

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused the petitioner has been made accused in this case. The petitioner is in custody since 29.05.2024. He further submits that

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69341 of 2024(4) dt.10-01-2025 2/2

¶15

petitioner has no concern either with the driver or owner of the vehicle. There is no material against the petitioner. The petitioner is ready to co-operate in the trial. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail. Chargesheet has already been submitted in this case.

¶16

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on the grounds that there is enough material against the petitioner and the recovery is of commercial quantity. He has referred Section 37 (1) (b) of the N.D.P.S. Act and submits that the chargesheet has been filed against the petitioner and the petitioner is not entitled to bail at this stage.

¶17

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the recovery of commercial quantity of gaanja , this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected.

¶18

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)

¶19

Siwani/-

Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Paswan 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

Bhola Sah @ Bhola Sahu Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Vijay Kant Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Anil Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sujeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sulekha Bibi Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Yadav @ Ajay Kumar Singh @ Anjay Yadav @ Anjay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar