Bindhyachal Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44235 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-783 Year-2024 Thana- DEHRI TOWN District- Rohtas ====================================================== Bindhyachal Singh Son of Late Ram Dutar Singh R/o Village - Dumra, P.S.- Kargahar, District - Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. N.N. Tiwari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.N. Tiwari, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dehri (Town) P.S. Case No. 783 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 20(B)(ii)(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is recovery of total 56.252 Kg Ganja from a bus.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner was not present at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44235 of 2025(5) dt.10-10-2025 2/3 the place of occurrence and no recovery of Ganja has been made from the possession of the petitioner. The alleged recovery has been made from a bus. It is next submitted that name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person recorded before the police whihch has got no evidentiary value in the eye of law. The petitioner is in custody since 20.12.2024 and has got one criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that co-accused person namely Dhanu Kumar @ Dhannu Singh has been granted regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42743 of 2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that the petitioner being party to the criminal conspiracy, as also the recovered contraband is above the commercial quantity, hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act and, therefore, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail. He further submits that the prayer for bail of the co-accused Sonu Chaudhary @ Sonu Kumar has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44235 of 2025(5) dt.10-10-2025 3/3 52673 of 2025. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent of similar nature of offence and, hence, he does not deserve bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act and the petitioner being party to the criminal conspiracy, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer is rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T