Patna High CourtCR. MISC./82648/2024bail granted

Tinku Yadav @ Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-12-03Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82648 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2024 Thana- SARSI District- Purnia ====================================================== Tinku Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Son of Sugga Yadav @ Suggi Lal Yadav Resident of Village- Sarsi Milik, P.S.- Sarsi, Distt.-Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

The Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar No.3, APP For the O.P. No.2 :

Dr. K.N. Singh, Sr. Adv., A.S.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as also learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sarsi P.S. Case No. 48 of 2024 in Spl. NDPS Case No. 46 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Section8(C)/21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The petitioner has earlier moved before this Court with a prayer for anticipatory bail which was dismissed vide order dated 26.06.2024 passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 43066 of 2024.

4. As per prosecution case, the police has recovered total 30 gm. Smack (Brown Sugar) from the possession of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82648 of 2024(2) dt.03-12-2024 2/3 co-accused persons.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused Dablu Singh and Suman Kumar, who were arrested on the spot. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The quantity of alleged contraband recovered is less than the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. There is no compliance of Section 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. There is a non-compliance of Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution case. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 30.07.2024 without any rhymes or reason.

6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and the O.P. No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

7. Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82648 of 2024(2) dt.03-12-2024 3/3 also taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Sarsi P.S. Case No. 48 of 2024 in Spl. NDPS Case No. 46 of 2024.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T