Surendra Sah @ Surender Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21705 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2024 Thana- CHHAURADANO District- East Champaran ====================================================== Surendra Sah @ Surender Sah S/o Lal Babu Sah @ Lalbabu Sa Kanu R/o village- Kalaiya, PS- Kalaiya, Dist- Bara, Country Nepal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, learned APP for the State. 2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chhauradano (Mahuawa) P.S. Case No. 21 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c) and 25 of the NDPS Act.

3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33386 of 2024 taking into consideration the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

4.

In compliance of the order dated 03.04.2026, a report dated 09.04.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21705 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026 2/2 has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that summons and non-bailable warrant have already been issued against the witnesses, but no any witness has turned up for examination. It is further reported that the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of nine months.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.01.2024 without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal antecedent.

6.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.

There is no new 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 preferably within a period of six months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of six months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T