Jay Shankar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53971 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2024 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== JAY SHANKAR KUMAR S/O MAHENDRA MAHTO R/O VILLAGESONBARSA @ WARD NO.-6, CHILRI SONBARSA, P.S- SONBARSA, DISTT.- SITAMARHI.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 21(C) of the NDPS Act in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No.115 of 2024.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that on information the force reached the place of occurrence and arrested Vivek who disclosed that the medicines containing psychotropic substances belongs to petitioner.
4. The learned counsel submits petitioners was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53971 of 2024(2) dt.29-08-2024 2/2 confessional statement of Vivek in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.
5. The learned APP vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the NDPS Act and the investigation of the case is in its nascent stages and the medicines which were recovered contains psychotropic substance which are harmful for the society.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.
7. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi for perusal and necessary action.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Prakash Narayan U T