Patna High CourtCR. MISC./85396/2019bail rejected

Narain Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2020-08-28Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85396 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2019 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== NARAIN YADAV S/o Dwarika Yadav Resident of Village- Piparahi, P.S.- Barachatti, Dist- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pawan Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 28-08-2020 Heard both sides through Video Conferencing.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Barachatty P.S. Case No.131 of 2019 registered under Sections 20 and 22 of N.D.P.S. Act.

The informant, S.I. of Barachatti P.S., after having received information about the keeping of narcotics substance in the house of Krishna Manjhi, Sudama Yadav and his brother Narain Yadav(the petitioner) raided the house of Krishna Manjhi and recovered 4 kgs. of ganja. Krishna Manjhi was apprehended. Thereafter, the informant raided the house of the petitioner and 6.5 kgs. Afim was recovered from the house of the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and in fact he has committed no offence. It

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85396 of 2019(3) dt.28-08-2020 2/2 is a highhandedness of the police. Petitioner does not reside in the place where the raid was conducted. No incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Petitioner was not arrested on the spot. Seizure list witnesses sworn affidavit that nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the house of the petitioner and Sudama Yadav. Perused the record. It appears that informant got secret information and thereafter raid was conducted in the house of Krishna Manjhi. 4 kgs. of ganja was recovered from the house of Krishna Manjhi. 6.5 kgs. of Afim fluid was recovered from the house of the petitioner in presence of the villagers.

Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saurabh/- U T