Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57562/2023bail rejected

Kunal Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-11-09Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57562 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2023 Thana- SASARAM RAIL P.S. District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

KUNAL SINGH SON OF SHASHI SEKHAR SINGH VILLAGE CHOTKI KOTHIYA, PS- BUXAR (INDUSTRIAL), DIST- BUXAR 2.

SHASIKANT KUMAR SON OF RAJENDER THAKUR VILLAGE CHOTKI KOTHIYA, PS- BUXAR (INDUSTRIAL), DIST- BUXAR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 09-11-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sasaram Rail (Dehri) P.S.Case no. 72 of 2023 registered under sections 8 and 20(b) (ii)(c) of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 14.44 kgs and 12.34 kgs ie a total of 26.78 kgs of ganja was recovered from the possession of the two petitioners.

4. It is submitted by learned Senior counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. No incriminating article has been recovered from their possession. They are in custody since 23.4.2023 and have no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57562 of 2023(3) dt.09-11-2023 2/2 criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case.

5. FSL report was called for which has been received. As per the report dated 22.9.2023, the seized articles have been found to be ganja.

7. Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation against the petitioners, according to which a total of 26.78 kgs of ganja was recovered from the possession of the two petitioners, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash U T