← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./12441/2024bail rejected

Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-02-27Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12441 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2023 Thana- MANSI RAIL P.S. District- Khagaria ====================================================== Sonu Kumar, Male, aged about 19 years, Son of Late Baleshwar Jha @ Baleshwar Singh, Resident of Village- Chakhussani ward no. 14, P.S.- Mansi, District- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mansi (Rail) P.S. Case No.51 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 8/20 (b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, it is a case of 8.60 kg. of ganja recovered from the possession of the petitioner. 4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petitioner and he is in custody since 21.09.2023. 5.

Learned APP appearing for the State, opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12441 of 2024(2) dt.27-02-2024 2/2 6.

On perusal of the first information report and seizure list, it appears that the FIR registered under Section 8/20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act against petitioner and total 8.60 kg. ganja was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and this is an above small quantity and below commercial quantity, in these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months and if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T