Patna High CourtCR. MISC./555/2023rejected

Kalam Hawari v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-20Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.555 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2022 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East Champaran ====================================================== KALAM HAWARI S/O Late Safik Hawari R/O Chadwa, P.S- Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Krishna Kant Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 8/21(C)/29 of the NDPS Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, on getting secret information police party proceeded towards place of occurrence, and apprehended two accused persons including the petitioner. On search, 750 gram Smack like substance were recovered from the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.555 of 2023(4) dt.20-07-2023 2/2 Case. No local person was made as a witness of the seizure list rather seizure list witnesses are police personnel. There is complete violation of provision of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and languishing in judicial custody since 26.06.2022.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail and submitted that the quantity of recovered smack like substance is more than commercial quantity.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the huge quantity of recovery of smack , this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U