Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34585/2025dismissed

Raja Kumar @ Raja Mandal @ Rupesh Kumar @ Rupesh Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-13Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34585 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2024 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Raja Kumar @ Raja Mandal @ Rupesh Kumar @ Rupesh Kumar Mandal S/o- Bhola Mandal Viilage- Harnathchak Police station- Gopalpur DistrictBhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Baijnath Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 13-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Special N.D.P.S. Case No. 26 of 2025 arising out of Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 265 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21(a), 22, 23(a) of N.D.P.S. Act and Sections 25(1-B)(a) and 35 of Arms Act.

3. On receiving information, police raided the house of the petitioner and from his house 40 gram brown-sugar and a country made pistol were recovered.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. The house from which the brown sugar was recovered is a joint

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34585 of 2025(4) dt.13-10-2025 2/2 house. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the fact that the recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner. In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) AjayMishra/- U T