Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27310 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2020 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== SONU KUMAR Son of Banarash Ray Resident of Village- Kehopur, P.S. and Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms.Bela Singh,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 12-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking regular bail in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 56 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8/20B(II)(a), 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and Section 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during vehicle checking the police apprehended this petitioner with one loaded country-made pistol, 300 grams charas and one motorcycle. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. It is submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner rather it has been procured by the police at the relevant time. The petitioner is in custody in connection with this case since 20.02.2020.

Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27310 of 2020(6) dt.12-01-2021 2/2 regular bail of the petitioner.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, wherein this petitioner has been arrested allegedly with one loaded country-made pistol and 300 grams of charas and he has been arrested while being on bail in similar kind of allegations in six other cases, there being serious kind of criminal antecedent and the arrest of the petitioner on the spot, at this stage, the Court is not inclined to grant privilege of regular bail to the petitioner. The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the trial be expedited.

Trial Court is directed to conduct the trial without granting any unnecessary adjournment and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In case the trial is not concluded within a period of six months for no reason attributable to the petitioner, he may renew his prayer for bail.

The application stands dismissed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T Note: The ordersheet duly signed has been attached with the record. However, in view of the present arrangements, during Pandemic period all concerned shall act on the basis of the copy of the order uploaded on the High Court website under the heading 'Judicial Orders Passed During The Pandemic Period'.