Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9701 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2022 Thana- KALER District- Jehanabad ====================================================== SANJAY KUMAR SON OF LATE KAMTA CHOUDHARY R/O MOHALLA- RAJENDRA NAGAR, RAILWAY HUNDER ROAD, P.S.- KADAMKUAN, DISTT.- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

UNION OIF INDIA THROUGH ZONAL DIRECTOR, NCB, PATNA BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar, Mr. Nishant Kiran For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar For UOI Mr. Abhay Shankar Jha, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 07-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for NCB, and learned APP for the State. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 10 of 2022 arising out of kaler PS Case No. 51 of 2022 instituted for the offence under Sections 8, 20 (b) (ii) C/25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

Prosecution case relates to recovery of 97 kg Ganja like substance packed in 71 sachet from a vehicle bearing Registration No. BR01PD1390 of which petitioner was driver and co-accused Ajit Kumar was sitting behind. Both the accused persons were apprehended on spot.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9701 of 2023(3) dt.07-07-2023 2/2 has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The seizure list is manufactured by the police officials as the same does not bear the signature of independent witness. Police has not complied the mandatory provision of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. Petitioner was simply a driver of the alleged vehicle and on instruction of owner, he was driving it and he has no any idea about keeping of illegal articles in the said vehicle. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 3.6.2022.

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for NCB. and submitted that the quantity of recovered article is more than commercial quantity. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U