Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23600/2024rejected

Pawan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-13Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23600 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2022 Thana- District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Pawan Kumar S/o Ganesh Mahto R/o Village- Kata Chok Sitamarhi @ Kanta Chawk Sitamarhi @ Kanta Chowk Sitamarhi, P.S.- Sitamarhi, Dist.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Union of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Ms.Sharda Kumari,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-09-2024 Heard Mr.Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Panday, Sr. C.G.C. and Ms.Sharda Kumari,learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 18.08.2022 in connection with NDPS Case Reg. No.15 of 2022 arising out of Kanhauli P.S. Case No. 128 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 18.08.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8/20(B)(ii)(A)NDPS Act and 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2018.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 03.08.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.36427 of 2023.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23600 of 2024(7) dt.13-09-2024 2/3 submits that as per allegation in the FIR that 900 Gms of Charas and 90 liters of Nepali Saufi wine was recovered from possession of the petitioner and although the petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2022 more than two years but the trial is not concluded as yet.

5. Learned counsel for the Union of India submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that 900 Gms of Charas has been recovered from possession of the petitioner which is 100 Gms less than the commercial quantity and apart from that, as per report of the learned Trial Court that the trial is going on and out of five chargesheet witnesses, two witnesses have already been examined and the case is pending for examination of rest of three prosecution witnesses.

6. In view of the aforesaid as well as allegation in the FIR, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with NDPS Case Reg. No.15 of 2022 arising out of Kanhauli P.S. Case No. 128 of 2022 pending in the court of learned 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge (NDPS Act), Sitamarhi/competent Court.

7. Prayer is refused.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23600 of 2024(7) dt.13-09-2024 3/3

8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T