Sudha Lal And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 20013 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -72 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ======================================================
1. Sudha Lal Wife of Sri Birendra Kumar Lal
2. Minakshi Kumari @ Dr. Minakshi, Daughter of Sri Birendra Kumar Lal
3. Dr. Birendra Kumar Lal son of late Dev Narayan Lal All are Resident of Village Punaura House no. 92 PS town, Dist Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.M.Pd.Mehta(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER
11. 01-12-2016 Heard Sri Vinay Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. Three petitioners, apprehending their arrest in Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 72 of 2016 registered for offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 379, 120(B), 284, 276 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 18(A), 18(B), 18(C), 17, 17(A), 17(B), 27(A), 27(B), 27(c), 27(d), 28, 28(A) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 & Amendment Act, 2008, Sections 18(a) (vi), 27(d) of DMR Act, 1954, Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 9A, 36Ac, 30 of DPCO Act, 1995 and Sections 8 & 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS Act"), have prayed for grant of bail.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20013 of 2016 (11) dt.01-12-2016 2/2 It was admitted by learned counsel for petitioners that after investigation, chargesheet has already been submitted, however; he submits that though F.I.R. was lodged, besides other provisions, under the provision of NDPS Act, chargesheet has not been submitted under the NDPS Act.
Sri A.M.P.Mehta, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail.
Besides hearing, I have also perused the materials on record. After going through the materials on record, the Court is not at all inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail. Moreover, once chargesheet has already been submitted, in normal course, anticipatory bail petition may not be entertained. The petition stands dismissed.
(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U T