Gajendra Narayan v. The Union Of India Through The Assistant Director, Directorate Of Enforcement, Govt. Of India,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24985 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2017 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Patna ====================================================== GAJENDRA NARAYAN S/o Ram Lakhan Yadav R/o village- Bardih (Bardi), P.S.- Salaiya, District- Aurangabad, at the relevant time resided at All, 3rd Floor, Paperwali Gali, Wast Baldev Park, P.S.- Jagatpuri, New Delhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India through the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Govt. of India, 1st Floor, Chandpura Place, Bank Road, West Gandhi Maidan Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Adv.

For the UOI :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 25-08-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special Case No. (PMLA) 04 of 2018 for the offence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that earlier the prayer for bail of this petitioner had been rejected by this Court vide order dated 02.12.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50340 of 2019. The petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 13.01.2020 i.e. more than one and half years and there is no substantial progress in the trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24985 of 2021(3) dt.25-08-2021 2/2 A report was called for regarding the stage of the trial and the same has been received from the trial court which indicates that the trial of the case has not been initiated as yet.

Learned counsel for the Union of India has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that earlier the prayer for bail of this petitioner has been rejected on merits and now no fresh ground is made out for reconsideration of the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected. However, the learned court below is directed to expedite the trial of the case and conclude it preferably within a period of six months from the receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) brajesh/- U T