Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31784/2023dismissed

Vir Bahadur Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-16Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31784 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-158 Year-2016 Thana- MALSALAMI District- Patna ====================================================== Vir Bahadur Yadav Son Of Ram Nath Yadav Resident Of Village- Chamarpur Ps- Shahpur, Distt- Bhojpur At Ara , Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lalan Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special N.D.P.S. Case No. 27 of 2016 arising out of Malsalami P.S. Case No. 158 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 20, 22, 23 and 25(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 432 Kg. of ganja was recovered from a truck and 208 Kg. has been recovered from a Bolero i.e., totalling 640 Kg. of ganja has been recovered from the truck and Bolero.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and was never present at the place of occurrence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31784 of 2023(4) dt.16-10-2023 2/2 The petitioner was caught redhanded along with the truck on the spot and is the owner of the truck. The petitioner is in custody since 10.06.2016. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite number of directions, the trial against the petitioner has not been concluded and the petitioner has completed more than seven and a half years in custody.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

6. The prosecution witnesses have already been examined. The trial is on the verge of completion. I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

8. Since the prosecution witnesses have been examined, the trial Court is directed to pronounce the judgment within a month from the date of receipt/communication of the order from this Court without unnecessary adjournment to either side.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T