Budhan Singh @ Budhan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45872 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== Budhan Singh @ Budhan Kumar S/o- Mahavir Singh Village-Sankhwa, P.SBarachatti, Dist-Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Indu Kumari Srivastava ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 30-07-2025

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Barachatti Police Station Case No. 81 of 2025, dated 01.03.2025, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 8(b)/18/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report lodged by the Forest Range Officer, Kadal Forest Area, Barachatti, Gaya, is that the petitioners were indulged in the cultivation of opium plants upon the protected forest land, which was destroyed by the forest officials.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45872 of 2025(2) dt.30-07-2025 2/2 this case due to village politics and the name of the petitioner has transpired on the basis of disclosure made by local villagers. He further submits that the petitioner was not found either cultivating upon the land in question or present at the place of occurrence.

5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration gravity of offence and the fact that name of the petitioner came to light after enquiry made by the Forest Officer, for which, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. This application is, accordingly, dismissed (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √