← Library
Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/933/2025dismissed

Krishna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-24Mr. Justice Bibek Chaudhuri2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.933 of 2025 In CRIMINAL REVISION No.677 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2024 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Krishna Kumar Son of Sivan Khatve @ Shiv Narayan Khatve Through Sivan Katve @ Shiv Narayan Khatve Village- Bela, ps- Basmatiya, Dist- Araria ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Md. Naushad Uzzoha For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 24-04-2025 This is an appeal under Section 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, filed by the father and natural guardian of the CICL, praying for bail.

2. It is not in dispute that the appellant while crossing the international border of India and Nepal was apprehended by members of SSB. On search, a packet measuring about 20 grams of Brown Sugar, was recovered from the physical possession of the appellant. It is ascertained from the case diary that one Vinod Chaupal being a drug peddler and kingpin of the incident who handed over the said packet to the appellant who deliver it to a person in Nepal. Thus, the appellant from his childhood has been working as a carrier of drug to earn easy

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.933 of 2025(2) dt.24-04-2025 2/2 money.

3. Considering the adverse effect of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances where little children are used, taking advantage of their poverty, act as carrier of narcotic drugs. This Court is of the view that for the sake of the benefit and development of the appellant as well as the society at large, he should be kept under the protective umbrella of the protection home.

4. For the reasons aforesaid, the prayer for bail is rejected. The appeal is accordingly, dismissed. (Bibek Chaudhuri, J) Suraj Dubey/- U T