Sushil Kumar Panziar @ Sushil Panziar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28453 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-353 Year-2023 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani ====================================================== SUSHIL KUMAR PANZIAR @ SUSHIL PANZIAR SON OF LATE RAJENDRA PANZIAR RESIDENT OF MARWARI MOHALLA JAINAGAR, P.S. - JAINAGAR, DISTRICT - MADHUBANI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Thakur Mrs.Vaishnavi Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-07-2024 Heard Mr. Ajay Thakur, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. Dilip Kumar No.1, learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(b), 21(c), 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act.

3.

As per the FIR, a raid was conducted in the shop of the co-accused namely, Akhilesh Kumar Panziar, who is the son of the petitioner, and huge quantity of illicit intoxicating tablets and codeine containing cough syrup was recovered. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28453 of 2024(2) dt.03-07-2024 2/3 that petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. He has been made accused in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion because he is the father of co-accused Akhilesh Kumar Panziar. There is no recovery of contraband article from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent, which is also mentioned in para-3 of the bail application. 5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as considering the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on his behalf is hereby rejected. 7.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today and seek for regular bail, the learned Court below shall pass the order on the same day in accordance with law considering that there is no recovery from the petitioner and petitioner is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28453 of 2024(2) dt.03-07-2024 3/3 not the owner of the said shop and he has been made accused only because he is the father of co-accused namely, Akhilesh Kumar Panziar .

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) shikha/- U T