Harish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32870 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2021 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Gaya ====================================================== Harish Kumar Son Of Satpal Singh Resident Of Mohalla - Parbariya Colony, H. No.- 1472, P.S.- Sarang, District - Faridabad (Hariyana). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manish Kumar No2 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 06-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Excise N.D.P.S. Case No. 62 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 8, 20(b), (I), (c) of the N.D.P.S. Act. Prosecution case relates to recovery of 1100 kg quantity of Ganja from the container of the truck thereafter this petitioner was arrested on spot.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner is innocent and committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this present case. Petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery of ganja and he was not having any knowledge of illicit articles kept in the truck. It is further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32870 of 2022(4) dt.06-02-2023 2/2 submitted that the petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said truck. Petitioner is languishing in custody since 23.8.2021.

Learned APP appearing for the state has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner was arrested on spot with the alleged recovery of ganja which is kept in container of the truck. As per the seizure list, the alleged recovery of ganja is huge in quantity and comes under the purview of the commercial quantity as per N.D.P.S Act.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the recovery of ganja is huge in quantity, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) shubham/- U T