Babu Lal Chaudhary @ Babu Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37581 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -136 Year- 2012 Thana -CIVIL LINE District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Babu Lal Chaudhary @ Babu Chaudhary son of Sanichar Chaudhary resident of Village Afjalpur P.S. Sherghati District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-10-2016 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.

Petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail, as languishing in custody since 08.04.2012, in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 17, 18, 20 and 23 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

The prosecution case is that three persons were apprehended, who disclosed their names as Abhishek Kumar, Arun Kumar and the petitioner Babu Lal Chaudhary @ Babu Chaudhary. The petitioner was carrying one black colour bag, from which 3.900 K.g opium was recovered.

Considering the commercial quantity of recovery, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37581 of 2016 (3) dt.28-10-2016 29.01.2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 46748 of 2012 rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner and thereafter on 16.03.2016 vide Cr. Misc. No. 12877 of 2014 also rejected the bail application.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that statement has been made in para-3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. The petitioner was carrying the bag at the behest of someone else and he has falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that out of seven witnesses, four witnesses have been examined during trial.

This Court vide order dated 16.03.2016 directed the trial court to expedite the trial. The Superintendent of Police, Gaya was also directed to ensure the attendance of the witness on the date fixed in the case and the trial be proceeded on day-to-day basis for early disposal. The said order stipulates that two witnesses have already been examined, but still the trial has not concluded. It is expected from the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Ist-cum-Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Gaya to conclude the trial expeditiously without giving any adjournment.

Keeping in view of the commercial quantity of recovery, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 09 of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37581 of 2016 (3) dt.28-10-2016 2012, arising out of Civil Line P.S. Case No. 136 of 2012, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions JudgeIst-cum-Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Gaya. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) P.K./- U T