Vinay Mukhiya @ Vinay v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10947 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2024 Thana- RAIL P.S. DARBHANGA (JAYNAGAR) District- Madhubani ====================================================== Vinay Mukhiya @ Vinay Son of Jitan Mukhiya @ Jitana Mukhiya R/oVillage - Karjahan, Ward No.11, P.S - Karjahan, District - Sirha Nepal ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
The Union of India, NDPS, Act Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Rail Police Station, Jaynagar P.S Case No. 49 of 2024 from the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madhubani registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20/22 of the N.D.P.S Act, 1985.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, on search Ganja weighing 1.600 Kg, 1.75 Kg and 1.900 Kg from separate polythenes found from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10947 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 2/2 petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he is an innocent persons. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 26.10.2024 and petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petition.
5. However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the F.I.R., impugned order and case diary, it appears that total 5.250 Kg ganja was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner which is more than small quantity and petitioner is custody since 26.10.2024.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Mayank/- U T