Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32439/2023dismissed

Anay Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2023-09-05Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32439 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2022 Thana- BATHNAHA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== ANAY PASWAN S/o Nathuni Paswan R/o village-Patel Nagar ward no.-4, P.S.-Sonbarsa, Dist-Sitamarhi, at present (Recent Status)-C/o Late Sitasharan Paswan, R/o village-Ram Nagar Boarder, P.S.-Kanhauli, Dist.-Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 05-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Bathnaha P.S,. Case No. 284 of 2022 registered under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8/20 (b) (ii) (c), 22 (b) and 23 of the NDPS Act lodged on 27.09.2022 by the informant, Rajesh Kumar.

3. As per the prosecution story, the allegation is that the police intercepted a car coming from Sonbarsa and although it tried to take a U-turn and leave the place, was stopped, the accused apprehended and as the Driver failed to provide any document, the vehicle was impounded and further upon search 45 K.G. 'ganja' recovered kept in 9 packets in the dickey of the said car.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32439 of 2023(4) dt.05-09-2023 2/2

4. The petitioner submits that he is innocent and little knowledge about the presence of 'ganja' and got implicated.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail stating that the recovered quantity is much above the commercial one which is 20 K.G.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail. Accordingly the same is rejected.

7. In view of the fact that he is in custody since 28.09.2022, it is high time that the Trial Court take the trial to its logical conclusion within a period of nine months from toiday. (Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U T