Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37276/2022rejected

Kiran Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2023-01-04Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37276 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2022 Thana- SIKTA District- West Champaran ====================================================== KIRAN DEVI WIFE OF BHARAT SAH R/O VILLAGE- BASANTPUR, TOLA BHERIHARI, P.S.- SATHI, DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satyendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 04-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 20,22,23, 24 and 27 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Prosecution case relates to recovery of 13.800 KG cannabis (charas) from a motorcycle of which petitioner was a pillion driver.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is a lady and she has asked to main accused Dilip Sah for lift to reach Bettiah. The alleged motorcycle does not belong to this petitioner and she was not in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37276 of 2022(3) dt.04-01-2023 2/2 knowledge about the keeping of Charas in the said motorcycle. She is in custody since 24.02.2022.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration that recovery of huge quantity of charas has been made, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and, as such, his application for bail is rejected. However, if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within a period of six months, she would be at liberty to renew her prayer for bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U