Patna High CourtCR. MISC./52301/2024dismissed

Sagar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

2024-08-01Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52301 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2024 Thana- BAHADURGANJ District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Sagar Mandal Son of Late Arjun Mandal Resident of village - Harinagar Ward No.- 07, P.S.- Bahadurganj, District - Kishanganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-08-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Bahadurganj P.S. Case No. 168 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 17(a), (18)a, 21(a), 29 of the NDPS Act 1985.

3. As per allegation, on a secret information, the informant along with police personnel reached the place of occurrence. The accused persons tried to flee away after seeing the police party, but they were apprehended. On search, 245 grams of Ganja was recovered from possession of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that nothing was recovered

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52301 of 2024(2) dt.01-08-2024 2/2 from possession of the petitioner. He has also submitted that the petitioner is aged about 67 years old and he is suffering from several old age disease. The petitioner is under custody since 09.06.2024.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has got four criminal antecedents. He has further submitted that the witnesses have fully supported the allegation against the petitioner in the case diary.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances as well as the gravity of the allegation and also the fact that the petitioner has four criminal antecedents, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail, which is hereby rejected.

7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after nine months from today, if the trial is not concluded.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T