Vikash Singh @ Bikash Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32305 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2022 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura ====================================================== VIKASH SINGH @ BIKASH SINGH SON OF DINESH SINGH R/O VILLAGE- LAUALAGAN, P.S.- CHAUSA, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA (BIHAR) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Anant Kumar 1 For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-11-2022 Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 63 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20, 22, 23, 24 of N.D.P.S. Act. As per prosecution case, there is alleged recovery of 3.500 kg Ganja from the plastic bag of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2022. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. Petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that nothing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32305 of 2022(2) dt.09-11-2022 2/3 has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and the entire allegation of alleged recovery of Ganja is absolute false. It is also submitted that the informant is a police officer and most witnesses are police and police officers who have naturally supported the prosecution case but no single independent witness has supported the prosecution case and petitioner has enemical terms with the seizure list witness so he has falsely implicated in this case. Co-accused Ranjeet Singh who has already been granted bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 31075 of 2022 by this court and the case of present petitioner stands more or less on similar footing.
The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. He further submits that the alleged recovery was from the plastic bag of the petitioner and said recovery is more than small quantity and less than commercial quantity.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, co-accused has already been granted bail by this court, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32305 of 2022(2) dt.09-11-2022 3/3 bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Madhepura in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 63 of 2022, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offences in future, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T