Idrish Mian @ Idrish Miyan @ Idrish Thakur v. The Union Of India Through The Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna Zonal Unit, Patna.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13721 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2020 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- East Champaran ====================================================== IDRISH MIAN @ IDRISH MIYAN @ IDRISH THAKUR S/o Joku Mian R/o village- Maheshda, P.S.- Gopalpur, Distt- - West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna Zonal Unit, Patna. Bihar 2.

The Intelligence Officer, Office of the Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna Zonal Unit Bihar 3.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashank Chandra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh (ASG) Mr. Abhay Shankar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Solicitor General.

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

The Court for the present is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, as the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by order dated 23.12.2021 in Cr. Misc. No. 31163 of 2021 on the ground that the driver of the vehicle from whose possession 50 kg of Charas was recovered had disclosed the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13721 of 2023(6) dt.10-05-2023 2/3 name of the petitioner based on which he was arrested. The petitioner filed SLA (Crl.) No. (s) 4471 of 2022 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order dated 23.12.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 31163 of 2021. The SLA was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by order dated 02.08.2023 but while dismissing the SLA (Crl.) the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the same would not come in the way of the petitioner filing afresh application for bail in change circumstances or after a lapse of reasonable time and if such an application is filed, the same could be considered in accordance with law.

The learned Additional Solicitor General submits that the trial has commenced and out of eight prosecution witnesses, one witness has been examined. The learned Additional Solicitor General next submits that he will advice the authorities to ensure that the trial is completed within a period of one year from today as out of eight witnesses, six prosecution witnesses are officials.

Considering the submissions made by the learned Additional Solicitor General, the Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer of bail of the petitioner for the present. Hence, the bail application is rejected.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13721 of 2023(6) dt.10-05-2023 3/3 However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the event, if the trial is not concluded within a period of one year from today for no fault of the petitioner.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Adnan/- U T