Rohit Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.51459 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Rohit Ram Son of Jagdish Ram, Resident of Village- Dengra Bajarga, P.S.- Baisi, District- Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rana Vikram Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-02-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 20, 21 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Allegedly, the petitioner was caught after chase and from his possession one bag containing six kgs of ganja was recovered and the petitioner stated that the same was handed over by Kamlesh.

Submission is of false implication and that the recovered article does not come under the purview of the commercial quantity and the mandatory provision of N.D.P.S. Act has not been complied with, the petitioner has been made victim of the circumstances resulting he is suffering in custody since

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51459 of 2015 (3) dt.16-02-2016 2/2 01.07.2015, he has got no criminal antecedent and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that now the petitioner by remaining in custody has been sufficiently penalized. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering detention of the petitioner, now he is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge- Cum- Special Judge, Kishanganj in Special Case No. 105 of 2015 arising out of Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 245 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T