Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30111 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2021 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Manoj Kumar S/o Mahendra Rai @ Mahendra Ray Resident of VillageManiyari, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Sangeeta Sharma, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-08-2022 The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within one month.

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, leaned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Sangeeta Sharma, learned APP for the State are present.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rajapakar P.S. case no. 221 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections, 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 22, 25, 29 of the NDPS Act.

Allegedly 708.445 kg narcotic material suspected to be ganja kept in several bundles was recovered from a truck and petitioner is stated to be the owner of the said truck. The main submissions advanced by Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner are that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30111 of 2022(2) dt.23-08-2022 2/2 petitioner had no concern with recovered narcotic material, he has been dragged in this case mainly on account of his ownership over the alleged truck and he was not arrested at the spot and he has clean antecedent and languishing in jail since 18.2.2022. Further submission is that the petitioner had no knowledge about the transportation of the alleged narcotic material by his truck.

Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

Having considered the recovery of huge quantity of narcotic material suspected to be ganja which was made from a truck and petitioner is stated to be the owner of the said vehicle, in the opinion of this Court it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly his prayer for bail stands rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and take steps to conclude the same at the earliest within one year, if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the stipulated period then the petitioner may renew his bail prayer before the trial Court which will be decided according to merit without being prejudiced with this order. (Shailendra Singh, J) siddharthkr/- U T