Sima Singh @ Kajal Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27660 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-613 Year-2022 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Sima Singh @ Kajal Singh D/o- Amar Singh, Wife of Kusum Singh VillageTapsi Parsauna Po Ps- Palanwa Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Pravin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bharat Bhushan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 31-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 613 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii) (c)/22 of the NDPS Act.
3. As per allegation, on a secret information, the informant along with other police party reached Chhatauni Bus Stand and apprehended three accused persons including the petitioner. On search, five packets of charas was recovered from the bag of the petitioner. Seven packets of charas was recovered from the bag of co-accused Santosh Kumar Gupta and eight packets of charas was recovered from the bag of co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27660 of 2024(4) dt.31-07-2024 2/2 Sagar Kumar. Total 18 kg 410 gm of Charas was recovered from possession of the accused persons.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. He is a person of clean antecedent and is under custody since 08.12.2022.
5. The FSL report is annexed with the case diary which shows that alleged recovered contraband is Charas. The alleged recovered charas is more than the commercial quantity.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege for bail, which is hereby rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T