Vinod Kumar Sah v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.46936 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -57 Year- 2015 Thana -KOILWAR District- BHOJPUR ====================================================== Vinod Kumar Sah, Son of Sri Bishwanath Sah, Resident of villageChhotaki Bishupur, P.S. Shahpur, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Bihar.
2. The Zonal Director, Narcotic Control Bureau, Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhu Narayan Sharma For the Opposite Party : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with Koilwar P.S. Case No. 57 of 2015, registered under Sections 20(B)(I)/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Bhojpur, Ara.
The prosecution case is that the informant Officer-inCharge of Koilwar Police Station after receiving secret information about carrying the Ganja on a Pic-up van started to checking the vehicle and in that course one vehicle bearing Reg. No. BR-03K-7918 was stopped by the Police and on seeing the Police personnel, three persons, including the driver of the said vehicle started to flee away, but driver and two others were
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46936 of 2015 (3) dt.17-02-2016 2/2 apprehended on the vehicle, who disclosed their names as Sanjay Kumhar, Guddu Kumar and Manoj Kumar Sah on search of the vehicle, 11 packets of ganja each contained 10 Kg recovered from the Pickup van.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has been apprehended by the Police mere on suspicion as the petitioner being the passenger was traveling in the said vehicle, which is said to be carrying the Ganja. Further submission is that petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2015.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that petitioner has criminal antecedent and he is also accused in similar nature of case i.e. Palamu Sadar (T) P.S. Case No. 384 of 2006. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T