Jasiro @ Jasir @ Jasir Uddin v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62478 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2022 Thana- KOCHADHAMAN District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Jasiro @ Jasir @ Jasir Uddin S/o Bipat Ali Resident of village- Gopalpur, P.S.- Bahadurganj, District- Kishanganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-10-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Special Case No.23A of 2022 arising out of Kochadhaman P. S. Case No.172 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 8(C), 20(b)(ii)(A), 21(a), 29, 22 of the NDPS Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of five cases and the informant alleges that Sajan and Md. Shakeel were apprehended and from Sajan 10 packets of smack along with other articles were recovered while from Md. Shakeel Rs.8700/- along with other articles were recovered as detailed in the FIR. On weighing, 05 grams smack along with 350 grams ganja was found. Further, the apprehended accused disclosed the name of gang member including the petitioner and also disclosed that petitioner is the kingpin.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62478 of 2025(3) dt.15-10-2025 2/2

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case since he carries antecedent of five cases. It is next submitted that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and his name transpired in the confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioner has antecedent of five cases, out of which three cases are under the NDPS Act and his name has transpired in the confessional statement apprehended accused disclosing that petitioner is the kingpin and investigation is continuing and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T