Pratiksha Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24312 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-178 Year-2020 Thana- ALAMGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== PRATIKSHA KUMARI Daughter of Birendra Kumar Sharma Resident of Village - Nainha, Vaishali, P.S.- Hajipur, District - Vaishali - 844124 (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Apurva Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-09-2020 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Alamganj P.S. Case No. 178 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Section 20/22 of the NDPS Act.

As per the prosecution case, while checking of the vehicles, one vehicle was stopped for routine check up and on query the driver disclosed himself as Jitendra Kumar and a lady was also sitting on the front seat of that vehicle and she disclosed her name as Pratiksha Kumari. From the dickey of said vehicle 106 kg of Ganja was recovered.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24312 of 2020(2) dt.24-09-2020 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner is innocent and in fact, she has taken simply taken lift and was unaware of the that narcotics were being transported by the said vehicle. No case under NDPS Act is made out against his petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2020 having no criminal antecedent.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that 106 kg of Ganja was recovered from the vehicle in which this petitioner seated on the front seat along wit other co-accused.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T