Sachin Babar v. The Union Of India Through The Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence Unit, Patna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22046 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2023 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna ====================================================== Sachin Babar Son of Shri Dilip Babar Resident of Mangalwedha, Post Office and Police Station- Mangalwedha, District- Solapur, Maharashtra-413305 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Unit, Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mohammad Akhter Hussain For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. K.N.Singh (A.D.S.G) For the UOI :
Mr. Ranvir Kumar, Sr. Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Complaint Case No. 88(O)/2023 arising out of DRI Patna Unit Case No. 22 of 2023-24 from the Court of learned Special Judge Economic Offence registered for the offences punishable under Sections 135(1)a and 135(1)(b) of the Custom Act, 1962.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that total 4000.300 grams of Rs. 2,62,13,221/- foreign origin gold recovered from a car. Petitioner was also inside the car with another.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22046 of 2024(3) dt.23-04-2024 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.12.2023 and petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petition.
5. However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. In view of the allegation, search memo, impugned order it appears that petitioner was also traveling in the said car. Petitioner belongs to the village of Maharashtra. Moreover, petitioner confessed before the competent authority and also considering the all aspects of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of one year. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Mayank/- U T