Guddu Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28769 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-606 Year-2021 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== Guddu Paswan S/o- Ramnath Paswan R/o- Dudhi Chak PS- Masaurhi District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025 1.

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

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 606 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the NDPS Act. It is next submitted that in sum and substance allegation as alleged in the FIR is that informant received information that petitioner along with Sanjit were indulging in selling ganja, accordingly he reached the place of occurrence when the accused fled and 4 Kg ganja was recovered.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28769 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 2/2 petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the information provided by the Chowkidar. 5.

The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioner was earlier implicated in a case relating to NDPS Act, as such this is the second implication of the petitioner in similar offence and investigation of the case is in its nascent stages, as such if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T