High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Arun Ray vs The State Of Bihar on 25 June, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Arun Ray vs The State Of Bihar on 25 June, 2010
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   Cr.Misc. No.13975 of 2010
                                ARUN RAY S/O LATE PITAMBER RAY
                                                   Versus
                                     1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
                                        2. UNION OF INDIA
                                                 -----------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Union of India : Md. Abu Haider, C.G.C.

———

4. 25.6.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Union

of India.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the

offence under Sections 20 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

It has been submitted that even though in the first

information report the allegation is that 92 kgs of ganja was

recovered from the house of the petitioner, but the two seizure list

witnesses examined in paragraphs 18 and 19 of the case diary

have specifically stated that the recovery was from behind the

house of the petitioner and probably it belonged to some other

person, who had run away. The further submission is that there is

no signature of the petitioner on the seizure list. The petitioner has

fair antecedents indicating that he is not involved in the business of

sale and purchase of ganja.

In view of such, let the petitioner above named, who is

in custody since 8.2.2010, be released on bail on furnishing bail

bond of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Vaishali in

Raghopur P.S.case No.7 of 2010, subject to the conditions (i) That

one of the bailors shall be the mother/wife of the petitioner and the
-2-

other bailor will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an

affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the

petitioner. The bailor will undertake to furnish information to the

court about any change in the address of the petitioner, (ii) that the

affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not an accused in

any other case and if he is he shall not be released on bail, (iii) that

the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court

concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar

nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court

below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of

bail on the ground of misuse and (iv) that the petitioner will be well

represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two

consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled.

( Anjana Prakash, J. )

Narendra/