Saroj Singh v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30513 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2016 Thana- ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR District- Patna ====================================================== Saroj Singh, aged about 45 years, Gender-Male, Son of Yadunath Singh Resident of Village-Srinagar Matihan, Near Primary School, Dighwara, P.S.- Dighwara (Dariyapur), District - Saran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The Union Of India 2.

The State of Bihar 3.

The Economic Offence Unit Bihar, Patna. Bihar ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate For the Union of India :

Mr. Satyadarshi Sanjay, Addl. Sol. General For EOU, Bihar :

Mr. V.N.P.Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mrs. Soni Shrivastava, Advocate Fpr the State :

Mr. Abhay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 02-08-2019 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned senior counsel for the Economic Offence Unit, learned senior counsel of the Union of India and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 8/20 (b) (ii) (c), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered in connection with Special Case No. 20(A)/2016 arising out of Economic Offence P.S. Case No. 04 of 2016.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with the alleged recovery of 425 Kg. of Ganja loaded on a truck having been named by co-accused Dharmendra Kumar Rajak and Santosh Kumar Mahto, who were in the truck at the time of occurrence. It is submitted that identity of the person named is doubtful as the petitioner is not the resident at the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30513 of 2019(3) dt.02-08-2019 2/2 address stated by the aforesaid two accused persons. The petitioner is also not the owner of mobile no. 9102508295 mentioned by the aforesaid two accused persons. The petitioner is an accused in one prior case under Section 307 and allied sections of the IPC

4. Mr. V.N.P.Sinha, learned senior counsel for the Economic Offence Unit, appears and opposes the petition, submitting on the basis of the statements made in paragraphs 196 to 201 of the supplementary case diary that in course of investigation sufficient materials have been collected against the petitioner to indicate that he has been identified as the person named by the aforesaid two accused persons. It has also come in course of investigation that it was the petitioner was the user of mobile no. 9102508295 as stated by some of the persons to whom calls were made from the said mobile number.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) BT/- U T