Reyaz Alam@Md. Reyaz Alam@Rayaz Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59164 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2025 Thana- GAUNAHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Reyaz Alam@Md. Reyaz Alam@Rayaz Alam S/o- Amamul Hasab @ Emamul Hasan Resident of Village- Rampurwa Parsa PS- Gaunaha DistWest Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vatsal Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 75 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c), 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that total 38.3 kilogram of ganja has been recovered in this case, out of which 20.43 kilogram ganja has been recovered from this petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case by the informant merely to satisfy their personal vendetta. The petitioner is in custody since 19.05.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59164 of 2025(2) dt.02-09-2025 2/2 of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further contended that petitioner was not even present at the place of occurrence. There is no compliance of Section 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act as also of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. submits that recovered contraband is above the commercial quantity, hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer is rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T