Sujit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35253 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2020 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka ====================================================== Sujit Kumar, son of Devan Yadav @ Devo Yadav resident of Village - Adriya, Police Station- Maralya (Parbatta), District- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Syed Masleh Uddin Ashraf, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Akshya Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 03-02-2021 Heard Mr. S. M. Ashraf, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Akshya Lal Pandit, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

This application, for grant of regular bail, arises out of Special Case No.02 of 2020 arising out of Baunsi Police Station Case No. 28 of 2020, disclosing offences under Sections 20(b) (II)(C)/22/23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

The allegation, as per the First Information Report is that police intercepted a Sumo vehicle bearing Registration No.BR-10PA-7815, which was being driven by the petitioner and recovered a total quantity of 120.06 kg of Ganja from the system box of the said vehicle.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35253 of 2020(3) dt.03-02-2021 2/2 petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case merely on the basis of the fact that he happens to be the driver of the vehicle from where Ganja has been recovered. Learned counsel next submits that materials seized from the vehicle has been declared as Ganja by the Inspector of Police, who is not competent to ascertain as to whether seized article is Ganja or not and it can only be ascertained through forensic examination of the seized article. Learned counsel next submits that the Ganja is not a psychotropic substance and the same is narcotic drugs, as such Section 23 of NDPS Act is not attracted against the petitioner. Learned counsel next submits that the petitioner is in custody since 01.02.

2020 having no criminal antecedent. Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact that huge quantity of Ganja has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner and the same is hereby rejected.