Raju Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4342 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2023 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Raju Sahani Son of Dhuruv Sahani Resident of village - Tikuliya ps - pipra , District -East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prateek Tandon, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 18-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Sugauli P.S Case no.119 of 2023 registered under sections 399, 402 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code, sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and sections 8, 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on the police reaching the place of occurrence, it is submitted that the accused persons attempted to escape but the petitioner was caught and on search 1.242 kg of charas was recovered from his possession.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 20.2.2024 (Annexure-1) passed in Cr. Misc. no.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4342 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2025 2/3 8633 of 2024 directing the trial Court to expedite the trial. Inspite of the petitioner having remained in custody for more than 2 years since 31.3.2023 and cooperating in the trial, there is no progress whatsoever in the trial. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial and to abide by any conditions which may be laid by this Court for his release on bail.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State who submits that besides the recovery of 1.242 kg of charas from the possession of the petitioner which is a commercial quantity, the petitioner was caught at the place of occurrence and has as many as thirteen antecedents.

6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court. As per report received contained in letter dated 24.2.2025, the case is pending for appearance of two accused namely Sandeep Kumar and Rahul Kumar whose bail bonds have been cancelled on 22.4.2024, non-bailable warrant of arrest and processes under section 82 of Cr.P.C. have been issued against them.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations of recovery of 1.242 kg (commercial quantity) of charas from the possession of the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4342 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2025 3/3 bail and the application is rejected.

8. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Bibhash/- U T