Krishnakant @ Krishnakant Singh v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4092 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2021 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL) District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Krishnakant @ Krishnakant Singh Son of Sona Singh Resident of Village / Mohalla - Penar, P.S. - Nokha, District - Rohtas (Sasaram) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union Of India 2.

Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Y. C. Verma- Sr. Advocate Mr. Priyanka Singh For Union of India :

Ms. Shail Kumari- CGC For the State :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-03-2025

1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the Union of India Ms. Shail Kumari and learned APP Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b), (ii), (c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that this is the fourth attempt of the petitioner to seek bail. It is further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 09.03.2021 and he is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that the case of the petitioner if not akin is similar to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4092 of 2025(2) dt.05-03-2025 2/3 that of Rakesh Kumar, who had also approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.75438 of 2023 and the same was allowed by an order dated 09.08.2024 passed by a learned Coordinate Bench.

4. It is next submitted that altogether there are six prosecution witnesses to be examined from the side of the prosecution and out of six witnesses till date, only two prosecution witnesses have been examined. It is submitted that when bail was granted to Rakesh Kumar by order dated 09.08.2024, till then, also two witnesses were examined, as such, even after lapse of more than six months i.e. till date only two prosecution witnesses have been examined.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India fairly submits that she is not aware that as to how many witnesses have been examined till date.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS, Aurangabad in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4092 of 2025(2) dt.05-03-2025 3/3 with N.C.B. Case No.06 of 2021.

7. The application stands allowed.

8. However, in the event, if the learned trial Court comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after his release is trying to delay the trial in any manner, the learned trial Court shall forthwith cancel his bail bonds after recording reasons and shall take all coercive steps to ensure that petitioner is behind bar.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T