Chandan Kr. Singh @ Chandan Kumar v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 27714 of 2013 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -81 Year- 2006 Thana -MOKAMA District- PATNA ====================================================== Chandan Kr. Singh @ Chandan Kumar S/O Sri Mahendra Prasad Singh, Advocate, Resident of Village- Shankarwar Tola Mokama, P.O & P.SMokama, District- Patna, At Present Resident of Mohalla- Vishnupur Pakari, P.S- Beaur, District- Patna.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sri Chandra Shekhar Kumar Sinha S/O name not known to the petitioner, Inspector Officer- in- Charge, Mokama Police Station, Patna. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dronachaya For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. D.P.Tiwary (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 4.
23-08-2016 Heard Sri Dronacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.P.Tiwary, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. The sole petitioner has approached this Court invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash an order dated 15-04-2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge 2nd, Barh, Patna in Special Case No. 25 of 2006 (arising out of Mokama P.S. Case No. 81 of 2006), whereby, the petition filed on behalf of petitioner for his discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the Court that recovery of smack was affected from the possession of one of the co-accused namely Rakesh Kumar Singh, who was apprehended. It has not been disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the F.I.R., there was accusation that about five
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27714 of 2013 (4) dt.23-08-2016 2/2 persons had arrived at a shop and demanded something and thereafter, police was informed. In the meanwhile, all accused persons fled away and only one accused namely Rakesh Kumar Singh was apprehended, from whose possession, recovery of smack was shown and as such, F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 387/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'NDPS Act'). It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since nothing was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, the petitioner may not be held guilty for the offence under the NDPS Act.
Besides hearing, I have also perused the materials available on record, including the order impugned. I do not find any apparent error warranting interference.
The petition stands dismissed.
Keeping in view the fact that the case is of the year 2006, while dismissing the present petition, it is desirable to observe that learned court below may take appropriate step so that the case may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below forthwith.
(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T