Tuntun Kumar @ Tunnu @Tunu Kumar @ Tuntun v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32243 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2019 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

Tuntun Kumar @ Tunnu @Tunu Kumar @ Tuntun Son of Late Shiv Narayan Prasad Nishad, Resident of Nand Nagar Colony, P.S.- Bahadrpur, District- Patna.

2.

Pappu Kumar Nishad @ Rahul Kumar @ Pappu Ku, Son of Late Shiv Narayan Prasad Nishad Resident of Nand Nagar Colony, P.S.- Bahadrpur, District- Patna.

3.

Rahul Kumar Nishad Son of Late Shiv Narayan Prasad Nishad Resident of Nand Nagar Colony, P.S.- Bahadrpur, District- Patna. 4.

Munna Kumar Nishad Son of Late Shiv Narayan Prasad Nishad Resident of Nand Nagar Colony, P.S.- Bahadrpur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sushil Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2019 Heard both sides.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Bahadurpur P.S. Case No.14 of 2019 registered under Sections 20 and 22 of the NDPS Act.

The informant got information that one Pintu Kahar, who is accused in Bahadurpur P.S. Case No.267 of 2018, was selling illicit liquor and on such, a raid was conducted but the accused persons managed to flee away. On enquiry, the people disclosed the names of petitioners, who are said to have indulged in selling contraband. On search, nine pouches of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32243 of 2019(2) dt.15-05-2019 2/2 ganja weighing 700 grams were recovered from the rack of the shop as well as from the bed of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are poor men and they subsist on running a shop. Nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioners and recovery is said to have been made from the shop and joint house of the petitioners, but it appears that on information when search was made, 700 grams ganja was recovered from the shop and the bed of the petitioners, which shows the involvement of the petitioners in selling ganja. Having considered the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U T