Ajay Prasad @ Ajay Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37615 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-383 Year-2020 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== AJAY PRASAD @ AJAY PRASAD YADAV S/o- Binda Rai resident of Village- Agarwa PS - Jitna Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Umanath Mishra, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20, 22 and 23 of the NDPS Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that 16 Kg. of Ganja was recovered from Vikash along with a motorcycle who disclosed the name of Manish who fled away and further disclosed that Ganja was given by Ganesh and petitioner for supplying it to Sunil.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37615 of 2025(2) dt.18-06-2025 2/2 implicated based on confessional statement of Vikash in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value in the eye of law.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that since there is prohibition in the State of Bihar as such smuggling of narcotics takes place in abundance. It is further submitted fairly that no doubt, the recovered Ganja is of small quantity but then investigation of the case is in its nascent stage and in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner in that event he may abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Ghorasahan (Jitna) P.S. Case No. 383 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Exclusive Special Judge Court No. II, NDPS, East Champaran at Motihari/Successor Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T