Hiraman Saw v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32133 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2024 Thana- DHANGAI District- Gaya ====================================================== Hiraman Saw S/o Late Jagdish Sao R/vill- Latkuta, P.S.- Dhangai, DisttGaya, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rahul Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 15, 18(c) and 25 of the NDPS Act.
3. Allegedly, the petitioner and others have been found indulged in cultivating poppy plants in the forest land of Thana No. 258, leading to institution of the FIR.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that from bare perusal of the FIR, it appears that poppy plants were destroyed on several dates in between 07.02.2024 to 01.03.2024, but the present FIR came to be lodged on 12.03.2024, after a month. Even if the allegation accepted to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32133 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025 2/3 true, the poppy plants were said to have been cultivated in the forest area, over which the petitioner has neither any concern nor during the course of investigation, it has come that any poppy plant or incriminating material has been recovered from his whereabout. Taking note of the aforesaid facts, other coaccused persons, having identical allegation allowed the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc No. 57643 of 2024 and in Cr. Misc. No. 69490 of 2024 vide order dated 04.09.2024 and 20.09.2024, respectively. The case of the petitioner is based on parity. All the more, the petitioner bears fair antecedent.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the nature of allegation and the fact that other co-accused persons have been allowed the privilege of anticipatory bail, coupled with fair antecedent let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32133 of 2025(3) dt.20-08-2025 3/3 the learned Session Judge-cum-Special Judge NDPS Act, Gaya in connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U T