Prem Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1950 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Prem Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 January, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen, Gautam Kumar Choudhary

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 2030 of 2023
                                                 ------
               Prem Munda, son of Nehla Munda, resident of village- Labga (Piditola), P.O and P.S.
               Dashmfall, District- Ranchi.                                 ...... Appellant(s)
                                           Versus
               The State of Jharkhand                                       ......Respondent(s)
                                           With
                             Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 1823 of 2023
                                                 ------
               Jagarnath Munda @ Jagay Munda                                ...... Appellant(s)
                                           Versus
               The State of Jharkhand                                       ......Respondent(s)
                                                  ------
                     CORAM          : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

: SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

------

For the Appellant(s): Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.

-----

I.A. No. 13012 of 2024 in Cr. A. (DB) No. 2030 of 2023 06/23.01.2025: This interlocutory application has been filed by the appellant praying therein to renew his prayer for bail.

2. The appellant has been been convicted in connection with NDPS Case No. 23/2019 for the offence under Section(s) 15(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 15(c) of the NDPS Act and other sentences for the other offences.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P and have gone through the impugned judgment, the evidence and the Trial Court Records.

4. Opportunity was given to the State to oppose the bail, which the State availed and opposed.

5. After hearing the parties, we find that from a truck, huge quantity of poppy straw was being off-loaded through another vehicle. The quantity of poppy straw in the truck was 1,710 Kg. The offloading was done through different vehicle including the vehicle, which belongs to the wife of this appellant. The recovery of 30 Kg of poppy straw was made from the vehicle of the wife of this appellant. It is admitted fact that the vehicle belongs to the wife of this appellant.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, we are not inclined to allow this interlocutory application. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant, named above, is rejected.

7. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

Anu/-Cp3. (GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)