Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9475 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2022 Thana- RAJIVNAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Son of Kedar Singh, Resident of Village- Madhuban, P.S.- Turki, District- Muzaffarpur, Present Address- resident of Gandhi Nagar Kanchanpuri, P.S.- Rajiv Nagar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Union of India through N.C.B New Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lovekush Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 03-05-2023 Let the defect, if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Spl. Case No. 72 of 2022 arising out of Spl. Case No. 96 of 2022 (regarding Rajeev Nagar P.S. Case No. 246 of 2022) dated 25.05.2022 lodged under Sections 8, 20(b), ii, (B), 25, 27(a) and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.

As per the prosecution, the recovery of Ganja has alleged to be made from the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9475 of 2023(2) dt.03-05-2023 2/2 said recovery was not made from the house of the petitioner rather it has been made from a nearby place. The total recovery is 5 kg. of Ganja has been made which is lesser than commercial quantity, therefore, bail may be granted. He further submits that petitioner was accused in two cases in which he is on bail and he is in custody since 26.05.2022. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and he submits that in the present case the petitioner is accused in NDPS case. He also submits that there are three criminal antecedent of the petitioner and out of three, there is two antecedent of NDPS.

Considering the aspect that the petitioner's name is figuring repeatedly in NDPS matter, therefore, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and bail petition of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

Trial court is directed to expedite the trial within nine months.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ravishankar/- U T