Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34919 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-734 Year-2024 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Vijay Kumar S/O Lal Bahadur Singh Resident of Village- Digha, P.S.- Dhangain, District- Bhojpur (Ara).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gajendra Nath Ojha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Nirmala Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 38 of 2024 arising out of Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 734 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 22(c), 25 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 18.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36826 of 2025. 4.

In compliance of the order dated 15.05.2026, a report dated 01.06.2026, with regard to the present stage of trial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34919 of 2026(3) dt.17-07-2026 2/2 has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that case is fixed for framing of charge. It is further reported that there are two charge sheet witnesses and trial is likely to be concluded within a period of nine months. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.10.2024, without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

6.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

8.

In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T