Vinod Singh @ Vinod Singh Bhokta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62380 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2024 Thana- DHANGAI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Vinod Singh @ Vinod Singh Bhokta Son of Jagdish Singh Bhokta @ Jagdish Singh Resident of Village - Lat, P.S. - Dhangai, District - Gaya 2.

Hiraman Sao Son of Jagdish Sao Resident of Village - Latkuta, P.S. - Dhangai, District - Gaya 3.

Bilash Bhuiyan @ Bilash Mandal @ Bilesh Bhuiyan @ Bilesh Mandal Son of Suresh Bhuiyan @ Suresh Mandal Resident of Village - Latkuta, P.S. - Dhangai, District - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mrs. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Dhangai P.S. Case No. 25 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 15, 18 (c) and 25 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The petitioners are said to have been involved in the cultivation of opium plants.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. They have been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62380 of 2024(2) dt.03-10-2024 2/2 nature. It is further submitted that the petitioners are farmers and they have no concern with the alleged occurrence. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that considering the nature of the allegation, the petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected.

7. However, if the petitioners surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail, the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T