Ghurpat Rai @ Ghurpat Rajbhar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6024 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-287 Year-2022 Thana- CHAINPUR District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Ghurpat Rai @ Ghurpat Rajbhar Son of Naresh Rai R/o village - Bhaganda, P.S.- Chainpur, District - Kaimur at Bhabhua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan For the State :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 01-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(C), 20(B) (ii)(C), 27(A)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

As per FIR, the petitioner was apprehended on the spot and upon search 29.10 kg incriminating ganja was recovered from the motorcycle which was kept in plastic bag tied on the pillion seat of the motorcycle. Accordingly, this case has been lodged.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. He has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition. It is also submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6024 of 2023(3) dt.01-08-2023 2/2 11.11.2022.

Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he was also apprehended on the spot with the alleged ganja like substance. The alleged recovery of 29.10 kg incriminating ganja is much more than commercial quantity as per the N.D.P.S. Act. Further, seizure list witnesses have also supported the prosecution case.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) lata/- U T