HARI BANS YADAV @ HARIBANS YADAV SON OF LATE GHUTAR YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KASRAUR, P.S. Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has invoked the inherent power of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Crimial P.C. ) for quashing the order dated 5.8.2016 passed by the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge, Darbhanga, Bihar, in connection with Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No.86 of 2016 dated 31.5.2016 giving rise to G.O. Case No.7 of 2016 registered under Sections 20 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short NDPS Act ) by which the application filed for bail under Sec. 167(2)(a)(ii) Crimial P.C. has been rejected.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that one Pankaj Kumar Panth, S.H.O., Ghanshyampur, Darbhanga received a secret information at about 4.30 a.m. on 31.5.2016 that two persons on a motorcycle carrying Ganja are likely to go to Nima from Kasraur. For verification of such information and necessary action, after giving information to the superior officer, the police party proceeded towards the place of occurrence where after some time the Circle Officer, Ghanshyampur also reached as a Magistrate. It is alleged that on seeing the police party, two persons riding on a motorcycle tried to flee away. After chase, one of them, the pillion rider was apprehended, but the other one who was driving the motorcycle managed to escape. The petitioner was the person apprehended and he also disclosed the name of the other accused, who had managed to flee away. It is alleged that the police recovered 12.5 Kg. Ganja from a bag found being carried by the petitioner.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid self statement of the S.H.O., Ghanshyampur, Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No.86 of 2016 was registered on 31st May, 2016 at 9.30 a.m. under Sections 20 and 22 of the NDPS Act against the petitioner and one Sudama Sahani. A seizure list was also prepared in respect of recovery of the alleged illicit Ganja. It is an admitted position that on 31st May, 2016 itself the petitioner was produced before the court and was remanded to judicial custody.