Mohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25686 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2024 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar ====================================================== Mohit Kumar Son of Brahmdeo Bhagat @ Brahmadev Bhagat Resident of Kursela, P.S. - Kursela, District - Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. This is the first regular bail application of the petitioner seeking his regular bail in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 222 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 21(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. According to the case of prosecution, it is alleged that on 18.11.2024 at about 10:20 P.M. on the basis of information received from the informant, the investigating officer along with other officials reached at Tea shop of the present applicant. On being searched, total 14 bottles each containing 100 ml. of CODEINE Syrup has been seized.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25686 of 2025(2) dt.02-05-2025 2/2 present case. The prohibited substance i.e. CODEINE which was found in the seized cough cyrup is within the small quantity. He further submits that petitioner is in custody since 18.11.2024, having no criminal antecedent. Therefore, it is prayed by him that the petitioner may be granted benefit of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and further considering the detention period of the petitioner and the quantity of seized contraband, I am of the view that it is a case where the petitioner should be granted benefit of bail.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

8. The petitioner, above named, 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 Sessions Judge, Katihar in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 222 of 2024.

(Arvind Singh Chandel , J) shailendra/- U T