Patna High CourtCR. MISC./27811/2016rejected

Sihail Ahmed Barbhuniya @ Siail Ahmed @ Md. Suhail Ahmad v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2016-07-13Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.27811 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -7 Year- 2016 Thana -KATIHAR GRP CASE District- KATIHAR ====================================================== Sihail Ahmed Barbhuniya @ Siail Ahmed @ Md. Suhail Ahmad, Son of Sahiruddin, Resident of Harinagar P.S. Katigorah, District Kochar, Silchar (Assam).

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Union of India, through the Director Narcotics Central Bureau, New Delhi or Regional Director Narcotics Central Bureau, Lucknow (U.P.).

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Mustaque Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Katihar Rail Case No. 07 of 2016, registered under Sections 8, 20, 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act, pending in the court of Special Judge, Katihar. The accusation is that the petitioner was found sitting on Berth No. 29 in A3 bogie of Rajdhani Express No. 12423 and one blue colour bag was found on Berth No. 29 containing 16 packets of Ganja in weight of 25 Kg.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that, in fact, the alleged bag was handed over to him by one Anil Kumar of Dimapur to carry the same upto Katihar and the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27811 of 2016 (2) dt.13-07-2016 2/2 petitioner was not aware about keeping ganja in the said bag. Further submission is that petitioner having no criminal antecedent is in custody since 05.02.2016.

Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that huge quantity of Ganja has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner, above named, is rejected.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.) manish/- U T