Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Pelu @ Pelu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31102 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1162 Year-2023 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Pelu @ Pelu, Son of Chotu Yadav, Resident of Village - Kharaihiya Basti, Ward No.- 10, P.S.- Araria, District - Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Kishore Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Renuka Ratnakar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-05-2025 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 1162 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21(b), 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The police on a secret information conducted raid and apprehended two persons namely Ravikant Paswan and Md. Jasim. In course of search 99 grams smack like substance and 2 kg 962 grams ganja alongwith cash of Rs. 6,40,500/- have been recovered. The apprehended persons disclosed the name of the petitioner as his accomplice.
4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31102 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 2/3 petitioner submitted that save and except the disclosure made by the apprehended person, that too before police, there is no material suggesting the complicity of the petitioner in present crime. In fact, on account of past criminal antecedent as has been disclosed in paragraph no. 3, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case. Neither any incriminating material has been recovered from the whereabout of the petitioner, nor any material has been collected during the course of investigation. The petitioner has no concern with the co-accused persons from whose possession any recovery has been made.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that apart from five criminal antecedent, out of which one relates to N.D.P.S. Act, the name of the petitioner has been disclosed by apprehended co-accused.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and the materials available on record, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, accordingly the same stands rejected. Suffice it to observe that if the petitioner surrenders before the Court below preferably within a period of four week, the same shall be considered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31102 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 3/3 without being prejudice by the order of this Court. (Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U T