Vishal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69067 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2022 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna ====================================================== VISHAL KUMAR Son of Ashok Rai Resident of Village - Nakta Diyara, P.S.- Digha, Town and District - Patna and presently residing at Digha Polsan Road, P.S.- Digha, Town and District - Patna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramhansh Kumar Puri For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-03-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 496 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8 (c), 22 (b) NDPS Act.

As per allegation, police apprehended the petitioner and 63 grams of article like brown sugar was recovered from his possession to which he disclosed that it was brown sugar. His associate Arun Kumar Yadav was also apprehended after a little chase but he had thrown the polythene containing brown sugar in a drain. Both the apprehended accused persons disclosed that it was co-accused Ram Laxman Rai who used to supply brown

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69067 of 2022(2) dt.14-03-2023 2/2 sugar to them.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent. The petitioner before his arrest was not given option to be searched before the gazetted officer or the Magistrate, as such, Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not complied. He also submits that the quantity is less than the commercial quantity.

The petitioner has been arrested at the spot. Brown sugar was recovered from his possession. He has a criminal antecedent under Section 30 (a)/56 (b) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. As such, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege for bail, which is hereby rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) SONALI/- U T