Rahmat Ansari v. The U.O.I. Through Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11518 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2018 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Patna ====================================================== RAHMAT ANSARI Son of Khalil Miyan Resident of Village-Pokharia, P.S.- Palojori, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE U.O.I. THROUGH INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, PATNA Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. S.D.Sanjay,Addl. Solicitor General Bihar, For the NCB :

Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-09-2021 Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, for the NCB. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special Case No. 07/2018 (Arising out of F. No. - NCB/PZU/V/04/18 dated 28.01.2018) instituted for the offence under Sections 8/20C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act.

The prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 17.05.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25059 of 2018.

104 kgs. of Ganja is said to have been recovered from a truck. The petitioners are the cleaner and driver of the truck respectively.

This Court had called for a report about the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11518 of 2020(3) dt.01-09-2021 2/2 stage of the case from the court below. The report indicates that the charges in this case was framed on 01.08.2019 and despite taking of steps for production of prosecution witnesses, till date no prosecution witness has appeared.

The petitioner is said to be in custody since 28.01.2018.

However, regard being had to the quantum of recovery, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner for the present.

Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. But looking at the period of custody of the petitioner, it is directed that the trial be expedited and be concluded positively within a period of six months from today. If there is no substantial progress in the trial within six months, it would be open for the petitioner to approach the trial court for grant of bail and in that event, the trial court shall be under an obligation to record the reasons for the tardy pace of trial. The application stands disposed off accordingly. (Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T