Dharmendra Singh @ Dharmendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74042 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2019 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== DHARMENDRA SINGH @ DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGH, Son of Rambharoshi Singh, Resident of Village - Sisiyatari, P.S.- Barachatti, and Distt.- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No2 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Naresh Ray ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 18, 28, 30 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. Informant who is a police officer has stated that on receiving specific information that some villagers are involved in sell and purchase of narcotic, he along with other police personnel reached said village and on seeing the police, villagers assembled there and on one motorcycle two persons started fleeing away, however, they were apprehended and from possession of the petitioner rupees two lacs and from other person, rupees one lacs were recovered. It is further alleged that there was a third person also who was carrying narcotic in a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74042 of 2019(2) dt.11-12-2019 2/2 plastic bag and he threw said bag and fled away and from said bag, Afim weighing 3.8 kilograms was recovered. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and no narcotic has been recovered from his possession and he is in custody since 25.04.2019.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation and recovery of Afim of more than commercial quantity, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Hence, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

However, petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after one year in jail custody. (S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- U T