Pintoo Yadav @ Pintu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38143 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2024 Thana- RATANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Pintoo Yadav @ Pintu Kumar Yadav, aged about 24 years, Son of Domi Yadav, Resident of Village - Samda Ward No.- 05, P.S.- Ratanpura, District - Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Patla Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024 arising out of Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 06 of 2024 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 21(B) and 22(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.

3. As per the prosecution case, some intoxicated articles has been recovered from the accused persons.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the basis of mere suspicion. He further submits that the seized articles has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38143 of 2024(3) dt.01-08-2024 2/3 recovered from the house/courtyard of Mukesh Singh and not the petitioner. He next submits that it is clear from the report filed by the informant in which he has neither named the petitioner nor anything has been recovered from his conscious possession. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petition is in custody since 22.02.2024.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail and has file counter affidavit, which is on record.

6. From perusal of the FIR, seizure list and impugned order of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-III, Supaul dated 08.04.2024, it appears that petitioner is named in the FIR and his name transpired in this case during the course of investigation. From perusal of the records, it also appears that the seized articles has been recovered from one co-accused Mukesh Singh and not the petitioner. Seizure list has been prepared but there is no any signature of the present petitioner. Petitioner is arrested on 22.02.2024 after one month of lodging the FIR and recovery of articles is from the house of Mukesh Singh and not the petitioner. So, considering all these aspects of the matter, I am inclined to enlarge bail to the petitioner. Let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38143 of 2024(3) dt.01-08-2024 3/3 like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Supaul in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024 arising out of Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 06 of 2024.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Anand Kr.

U T