[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Janishar Akhtar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 9 January, 2026
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 699 of 2025
Janishar Akhtar, aged about 30 Years, son of Sheikh Ainul
Haque, resident of village-Aambagan, Kapali, Post chandil, P.s-
Chandil (Kapali O.P), District Seraikella Kharsawan
...... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ....... Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
----------
For the Appellant : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, APP
-----------
ORAL ORDER IN COURT
06/Dated: 09th January, 2026
I.A. No.11099 of 2025
This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the
appellant challenging the judgment of conviction dated
22.07.2025 and Sentence dated 24.07.2025 passed by Sri
Chaudhary Ahsan Moiz, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-
cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, Seraikela-Kharsawan in
connection NDPS Case No.17 of 2022, arising out of Adityapur
P.S. Case No.70 of 2022 by which the appellant has been
convicted for the offence under Section 15(b) of the NDPS Act
and sentenced to undergo R.I for five (05) years and to pay the
fine of Rs.20,000/-.
2. I.A. No.11099 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the
appellant under Section 430(1) of the BNSS, 2023 for
suspension of sentence and for grant of bail, during pendency
of the appeal.
3. Heard Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellant and learned APP for the State.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
impugned judgment and sentence passed by the learned Court
below is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law.
It is submitted that the allegation levelled against the appellant
is false and concocted. It is submitted that the police has
shown recovery of Brown Sugar 42 gms. However, the FSL
report marked as Exhibit-9 shows that the recovered substance
is not Cannabis or Brown Sugar and thus, the charges levelled
against the appellant is not proved. It is submitted that the
appellant is not the owner of the Car in question bearing
Registration No.JH05CZ-8635 and the said Car belong to
Shera Khatoon, who is the mother of the co-accused Saddam
Khan. It is submitted that the appellant was arrested on
24.04.2022 and he was released on bail on 10.08.2023 in B.A
No.3968 of 2023 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble
Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) of this Court. Thereafter the bail of
the appellant was cancelled on 07.02.2025 and he surrendered
before the learned Court below on 16.06.2025 and since then
he is in custody (i.e. for around seven (07) months) and earlier
he remained in custody for around one (01) year and three
(03) months and thus, he remained in custody for around
twenty two (22) months and hence, he may be enlarged on
bail.
5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer
for bail. It is submitted that there is recovery of Brown Sugar
from the Car in which the appellant was sitting. It is submitted
that P.W-1, P.W-3, P.W-5 namely Sanjeet Kumar, Pintu
Kumar and Suman Kumar Singh who are the Constables, have
fully supported the case against the appellant whereas P.W-2
namely Alok Kumar Dubey (i.e. Sub Inspector), P.W-4
namely Alok Ranjan Choudhary is also Sub-Inspector and
they were also the member of raiding party have supported the
case against the appellant whereas the P.W-7 is the I.O of this
case. It is submitted that the appellant was caught raid handed
with Brown Sugar of 42 gms and hence, the prayer for bail of
the appellant may be rejected.
6. Perused the L.C.R and considered the submission of
both sides.
7. It appears that on 23.04.2022 while the appellant along
with co-accused Saddam Khan was going by Car bearing
Registration No.JH05CZ-8635, the police recovered 42 gms
of Brown Sugar from the Dicky of the Car.
8. It transpires that P.W-1, P.W-3, P.W-5 namely Sanjeet
Kumar, Pintu Kumar and Suman Kumar Singh are the
Constables whereas P.W-2 and P.W-4 Alok Kumar Dubey and
Alok Ranjan Choudhary are Sub-Inspectors and they have
supported the recovery of 42 gms of Brown Sugar from the
Car in which the appellant with co-accused was sitting.
9. It appears from the evidence of P.W-2-Alok Kumar
Dubey, Sub Inspector that Saddam Khan, who had fled away
from the Car, is a man of criminal antecedent and several
cases are pending against him and the Car was trapped in a
ditch.
10. It appears from the evidence of P.W-3, P.W-4 and
P.W-5 that Saddam Khan were going to sell the said Brown
Sugar in Muslim Basti to one Dancha @ Jawed.
11. However, from perusal of the FSL report marked as
Exhibit-9, it appears that no Cannabis product, Opiates,
Benzodiazepines or Alkaloidal drug could be detected in the
contents of the paper marked as X and recovery of Brown
Sugar was not proved.
12. Considering the custody of the appellant and on the facts
and in the circumstance that the recovered product was not
Brown Sugar, the appellant namely, Janishar Akhtar, is
directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties of the
like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, Seraikela-Kharsawan
in connection NDPS Case No.17 of 2022, arising out of
Adityapur P.S. Case No.70 of 2022, subject to the
Undertaking that the appellant will not be indulged in such
type of crime again and also subject to the condition that one
of the bailors must be the own relative of the appellant.
13. Thus, I.A. No.11099 of 2025 is allowed and stands
disposed of.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Dated: 09.01.2026
Saket/-
