Thakur Shanni Pratap Singh @ Shanni v. The Union Of India Ncb

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16209 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2023 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL) District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Thakur Shanni Pratap Singh @ Shanni Son of Sh. Shatrudhan Singh R/o Ward No.- 27, P.S.- Dehri-on-Sone, District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India NCB New Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Priyanka Singh, Advocate For Union of India :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. CGC Mr. Arvind Kumar, CGC Mr. Lokesh, Advocate Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned senior counsel for Union of India.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NCB Case No. 14 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 & 29 of the NDPS Act.

3. Earlier, vide order dated 08.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5709 of 2024 regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the recovery of the contraband beyond the commercial quantity coupled with embargo under section 37 of the NDPS Act.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 04.11.2023

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16209 of 2026(5) dt.01-05-2026 2/2 without any rhymes or reason. He further submits that only five prosecution witnesses out of nine witnesses have been examined and the last witness was examined on 17.02.2026.

6. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India opposes the prayer for grant of bail and has also filed counter-affidavit.

7. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of three months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T