Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32944/2024rejected

Md. Noor v. The State Of Bihar

2024-06-21Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32944 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2022 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Md. Noor Son Of Sheikh Serajuddin Resident Of Village - Govindpur, P.S. -PIRPAINTY, District - Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Syed Maslehuddin Ashraf, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-06-2024 Heard Mr.Syed Maslehuddin Ashraf, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Binod Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 14.02.2024 in connection with Pirpainty P.S. Case No. 118 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 12.04.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8,20(B)(ii)(c),22 of the of N.D.P.S. Act.

3. Recovery is of 83 kilograms of Ganja.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submits that it appears from the FIR as well as the seizure list that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32944 of 2024(2) dt.21-06-2024 2/3 petitioner has no concern at all with the alleged recovery or the present crime in question.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that altogether 83 kilograms of Ganja has been recovered from the bamboo orchard of the petitioner and the recovered contraband is more than the commercial quantity.

6. The grant of bail in NDPS cases where the recovery of commercial quantity of narcotic is alleged is circumscribed under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 37 which says that before grant of bail, the Court must have reason to believe that the petitioner has not committed the offence and in the event of release he would not commit similar offence.

7. The issue was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala and Ors Vs. Rajesh & Ors, reported in 2020(12) SCC 122 as well as in the case of Narcotic Control Bureau Vs.Mohit Aggarwal reported in AIR 2022 SC 3444 and recently decided the judgment in the case of Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346.

8. The recovery of huge quantity of Ganja from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32944 of 2024(2) dt.21-06-2024 3/3 possession of the petitioner would not justify that the petitioner had no knowledge of the narcotic nor there is any material to substantiate that the petitioner would not commit such offence in the event of release.

9. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Pirpainty P.S. Case No. 118 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur.

10. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T